Renaissance

All books from the renaissance literary period

Shakespeare fail: The Tempest

30 Jan 2012

11 Comments

Welp I fail the Shakespeare challenge. I decided to read The Tempest for Allie’s Shakespeare reading month but I just don’t think I am going to finish it before the 10th. Maybe I will but even if I do, I don’t have much to say about it.

It started out well enough. The writing is strikingly beautiful in some places (see above) but the further I got into The Tempest the more apparent it became that this was a very visual work and reading alone just was not capturing it for me. I read Hamlet last year and love it. But that was a more psychological play, it transfers well into the written word. The Tempest on the other hand is all about a magical island, sprites, an animalistic man, a magician, storms, fools wandering the island in wonder…It’s about visuals and sounds and the experience. There is much singing and dancing, and all of that is lost on the page. Plus, I just don’t find myself very interested in any of the characters, except maybe Caliban.

There have been a lot of GREAT Shakespeare posts coming through my reader and I really enjoyed reading them. But now, I am feeling positively Shakespeare-d out. I still have Richard the III and A Winter’s Tale on my shelf and I look forward to reading those but down the road quite a ways, maybe in the summer.

In other reading news, I am about 500 pages into Charlotte Bronte’s Shirley. I am enjoying it but it is a little slow going. The namesake of the book does not even come into it until about page 300! Shirley is a leisurely stroll, much less eventful than Jane Eyre or even Villette, but one I want to finish because I definitely want to know how it ends. Shirley is one to read from my preparing for The Madwoman in the Attic list. I’m making some good progress on that (the list is on my 2012 Challenges page) and would like to maybe read The Tenant of Wildfell Hall next. But I might have to break up the Bronte-athon will something modern. Hemingway’s The Old Man and the Sea is eyeing me from the shelf and, something completely different, Mary Shelley’s The Last Man is tempting me.

Now all 5 books I have mentioned in this post are either new purchases or ebooks. NONE are from my original classics collection. *head-desk* I should really get back to those books and start ticking some of the 199 off! Or, I should at least be reading from my To Be Read in 2012 challenge list! But I’m just not in the mood for those, except maybe some Oscar Wilde..he actually sounds fun right now.

So kind of fail all around on what I originally planned to read but it may be better just to let go and travel where the books take me.

By: Shannon Category: Classic literature, Now reading, Renaissance, Victorian Tags: , , ,

Classics Challenge January: All about the author

4 Jan 2012

21 Comments

 I am participating in a year long Classics Challenge hosted by November’s Autumn. The challenge is to read at least 7 classic works in 2012. On the 4th of each month Katherine of N.A. will pose a question for challenge participants to answer regarding whatever classic book  they happen to be reading at the moment.

_____________

January’s questions are all about the author:

  • Who is the author?  
    This month I am reading The Tempest by William Shakespeare

    • What do they look like? 
      We do not know for sure what Shakespeare looked like, “none of the portraits qualifies as a verified likeness of him, for no evidence exists that Shakespeare actually sat for a portrait. Artists could have executed their portraits from memory or from descriptions of Shakespeare provided by persons who knew him. Even the so-called authentic likeness of Shakespeare–the 1623 Martin Droeshout engraving of him that appeared in the First Folio, the first published collection of Shakespeare’s plays–is suspect. The artist was only 15 when Shakespeare died in 1616. Apparently, Droeshout completed the portrait shortly before the First Folio publication.”  [1]
  • When were they born? Where did they live?
    Shakespeare was baptized on the 26th of April 1564. A baby had to be baptized on the Sunday following his or her birth, unless the parents could give a valid reason for not baptizing immediately. Therefore we can safely assume Shakespeare was born earlier that week. Shakespeare spent his childhood in Stratford-upon-Avon. The family was believed to live on Henley Street in the home shown below. The home has been under the care of the Shakespeare Birthplace Trust since 1847

 

 

  • What does their handwriting look like?
    Six signatures of Shakespeare are known

    Image via Lawpundit

    There is also a play by Anthony Munday called Sir Thomas More, that is said to contain an addition written in Shakespeare’s hand, this is controversial though.

  • What is an interesting and random fact about their life? 
    Something I find interesting about Shakespeare is that it is widely said he was uneducated, or more specifically he did not go to college. Yet, Shakespeare’s father was a politician in their town of Stratford upon Avon and therefore Shakespeare and his siblings were eligible for a grammar school education at no cost to the family. There is no reason to suppose the family would not take advantage of this and it seems likely Shakespeare went to school from the ages of 7 to 14.
    Now a grammar school education in Elizabethan times was very different from the elementary school subjects taught now. Shakespeare would have been taught Latin and practiced translating Latin to English and English to Latin. A basic education included 7 to 11 hours a day studying the works of the great classical authors and dramatists such as Ovid, Plautus, Horace, Virgil, Cicero and Seneca [2] The type of education provided in grammar schools of the 16th century could be compared to a degree program in the classics today. In my opinion there is no reason to doubt that Shakespeare had the knowledge, ability, and historical education to write his plays.
    One other thing I found interesting is that Elizabethan schools were not big on handwriting. If it was taught, it was by a specialist teacher who visited the school for only a few weeks. [3] Also the English language was very much in a state of flux at this time. So, Shakespeare’s handwriting and spelling are really not a reflection on his intelligence.

________

Visit the November’s Autumn blog for links to more classic challenge January participants!

By: Shannon Category: Classic literature, Renaissance, The play's the thing, Understanding & Interpretation Tags: ,

Shakespeare in January

31 Dec 2011

9 Comments

I have been keeping an eye on A Literary odyssey’s Shakespeare Reading month challenge and becoming… maybe a little jealous ;) of some bloggers grand plans to read many or ALL of Shakespeare’s work in January. I wish I could even hope to accomplish such a thing but there is no way lol! If I had all of Shakespeare’s plays on my shelf, which would be awesome and drool worthy, I could try to read all the plays straight through, skipping the introductions and appendixes. But, I am quite certain that by the end of the month I would have no idea what the hell just happened lol. I am still new to Shakespeare and need those introductions and all the notation. Plus I really enjoy them, especially the historical perspective.

Lovely Dh did buy me three new Arden Shakespeare’s for Christmas which gives me the perfect excuse to man (ehh woman) up and join the reading challenge. I though, only plan to tackle one of Shakespeare’s plays (mayyyyybe two, but doubtful). I’ll be reading The Tempest, very slowly, and if a miracle happens, The Winter’s Tale.

Also on the Shakespeare front, Risa is hosting a year long play a month challenge! I know I’m not up to this one, although I wish I was. But I am very much looking forward to all the Shakespeare posts coming up because of these challenges. Here’s to the bard!

 

By: Shannon Category: Reading challenges, Renaissance, The play's the thing Tags: ,

The Arden Shakespeare Hamlet

24 Jun 2011

2 Comments

I am on the last few pages of Appendix 5 in the Arden edition of Hamlet. I finished the play several days ago but with this edition the majority of my time was spent reading the lengthy introduction, the massive amount of annotation, and – just when I thought I was done- 6 appendixes.

No doubt about it, the Arden edition is work to read. It has a scholarly bent and is not for someone who isn’t prepared to invest some time. I was tempted here and there to skip bits. For example: where the editors explain, extensively, why they decided to use the Q2 version of Hamlet vs Q1 or F (more on this in a moment) or their explanation of why they ended up publishing Q1 and F as a companion edition. But every time I skipped a page, I ended up going back and reading it anyway. Because although lengthy, these details about the play, its many editions and textual interpretations, really are interesting.

Now in case you are not familiar, which I wasn’t before reading the book, the earliest copies of Shakespeare’s Hamlet have been found in three versions. The first version of the play found is called Q1 ( Q standing for Quatro). Q1 is the shortest edition and is thought to essentially be a bootleg. I.e. not copied directly from Shakespeare’s own papers or script but written down by a publisher as remembered by an actor or viewer of the play.

Next is Q2, this seems to be the favored version by most and the one Arden chose to feature. Q2 is thought to be largely copied directly from Shakespeare’s own papers.

Finally we have F, standing for first folio. This edition is believed to be copied from a script of Hamlet with Shakespeare’s own (probably post Q2) revisions.

Getting all the way back to Q1, they think that the performance memorized and written down as Q1, was in fact the play with an F script. So you can see how intermingled and confusing the various editions are. Once you start to look at all the Hamlet editions with “corrections”, often arbitrary as editors tend to over-correct instead of just leaving well enough alone. And then you have versions editors have decided to make “ideal”- what they think Shakespeare really intended- by cutting and pasting various pieces of the three plays into one, as they see fit. Now you really do have a confusing mess of Hamlets through the ages.

A major part of the Arden edition is to clear up this Hamlet chaos. To explain how the play has been published or performed in the past and why Arden has tried to get back to a less tempered with version of the play by accepting Q1, Q2, and F as independent Hamlets that should be read on their own terms. The editors do make some corrections to the plays. But they try to only change the obvious transcription errors which cause a line to make no sense. And when they do correct, the editors have looked to the other two versions of the play for answers, rather than try to channel their inner Great Bard.

Well you can see I’ve filled an entire post about the intro and appendixes of Hamlet without mentioning the play itself at all. This is a bit how my head feels after reading this edition. There is so much information and history to absorb that I really feel like I need to go back and read the play on its own. When I am finished re-reading, I may have to buy the second book and read Q1 and F as well.

By: Shannon Category: Finis, analysis and reviews, Renaissance, The play's the thing Tags: ,

Now Reading: Too many books

10 Jun 2011

5 Comments

Some how I ended up reading several books at once. Normally I am against this, limiting myself to one fiction book at a time and maybe one non-fiction. An anthology, text book, or poetry, something easily picked up and put down again works well for me as a secondary book. I don’t like to mingle fiction. I’d rather be completely immersed in one set of characters. But this month, I was too tempted. Books are jumping off the shelf and flinging themselves at me. I couldn’t resist.
So my reading list…

1- Still reading The Norton Anthology of English Lit. I haven’t picked this up in awhile though. As soon as I finish one of the other books I’m reading I am determined to get back to it. The information in the anthology about each piece included is really interesting. The problem is, I am really just not that into Medieval literature. This anthology is part of a collection starting with medieval and going all the way through to the 20th century. I’m half wishing I would have just skipped ahead to the 18th century and the Romantics. But, even my Dh says: No, no, no you should do it right and start at the beginning. And that is exactly my mindset, what I really want to accomplish as a way of seeing the bigger picture and evolution of literature. So I am trudging along.

2- The Arden edition of Hamlet. I was a little disappointed in the introduction of this one. I guess I was hoping for more info about Shakespeare himself and the interpretations of Hamlet and less about the technical history of the play, performance dates etc. I am well into the play itself now and the annotation is really good. However, it’s work to read and I only read it at times when I can concentrate and am not too tired. The reason it stresses the brain is because I read the play, read the annotation, and then read the play again. So while it’s not hard to understand, it is time consuming.

3- With all this reading work to do, I needed something fun. Dh and I just watched the BBC’s Sherlock, recommended to me by Dried Humor, and loved it. Seriously it’s a great show but we are now completely depressed that there were only 3 episodes. Well after watching the show I could not resist picking up The Complete Sherlock Holmes Vol 1 from my shelf. A collection of short, amusing stories to read in the sunshine in my back yard is just what I needed. Most of the stories follow a pretty narrow layout: here’s Sherlock Holmes hanging out in his dressing gown at home with Watson, here comes distressed somebody with a mystery, everyone baffled, Sherlock solves it-elementary, Sherlock explains how easy it was to Watson.

In the second half of the book, the stories really are short, just 20 pages or so. They read as what they were, stories included in a monthly magazine. It’s interesting how Dickens was also published monthly but in series so his books come across now as complete novels. Doyle decided he wanted each story to stand alone, so if a reader missed an issue they were not lost and could just pick up with Sherlock on his next adventure. Despite being too short for my usual taste and a little predictable in form, the Sherlock stories are so well written, you really can’t help but enjoy them.

4-The final book I am reading is not for my own amusement or education. I am reading Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone at night to my daughter. We are only a couple chapters in and so far she is enjoying it. She is only 7, so sometimes she gets a bit confused about what’s going on. I’m enjoying a break away from the monotony of fairy books lol but I do find Harry Potter difficult to read out loud. Rowling must be the Queen of the run on sentence. She certainly gives Dickens a run for his money. With HP it is comma, after comma, after comma, where periods should clearly be! It makes it difficult to develop a reading aloud rhythm. Hopefully as we read further I’ll catch on to when I can stop to breath.

By: Shannon Category: Classic literature, Contemporary fiction, Edwardian, Now reading, Renaissance Tags: , , , , , , , ,
1 2