Shakespeare References in Mrs. Pargeter’s Pound Of Flesh

Simon Brett’s mystery novel Mrs. Pargeter’s Pound Of Flesh contains a few Shakespeare references. The first, obviously, is in the very title of the book, which is a reference to The Merchant Of Venice, and specifically to Shylock’s bond. That title is what drew me to the book in the first place. The first reference within the book’s pages, however, is not to Merchant, but to Hamlet. Simon Brett writes: “But Mrs. Pargeter had interrupted him firmly, insisting she always would pay for everything. ‘Neither a lender nor a borrower be,’ she had said, quoting another of the late Mr. Pargeter’s regular sayings (though he may perhaps have borrowed that one from someone else)” (p. 76). Yes, indeed he did. The line is part of the advice that Polonius gives to Laertes.in the play’s first act. It isn’t until near the end of the book that Simon Brett refers to The Merchant Of Venice, writing “Shylock was not more pertinacious in his demands than she in her determination to settle scores with Julian Embridge” (p. 197). And then: “His betrayal of the late Mr. Pargeter was avenged. Mrs. Pargeter had her pound of flesh” (p. 204).

Mrs. Pargater’s Pound Of Flesh was published in 1992. My copy was the hardcover edition.

Desperate Measures (International City Theatre’s 2025 Production) Theatre Review

production photo by Jordan Gohara

The International City Theatre’s season opened this past weekend with the Los Angeles area premiere of Desperate Measures, a musical adaptation of Shakespeare’s Measure For Measure, written by Peter Kellogg, with music by David Friedman. I suppose it’s become a commonplace that Shakespeare is always relevant, but that doesn’t make it any less true, as is evident by this production and the audience’s enthusiastic response. This play takes much of the plot of Measure For Measure, and sets the action in the American west of the late 1800s, when the law wasn’t always quite lawful, when those in positions of power used those positions to their own benefit (that certainly sounds familiar now, doesn’t it?). This production stars Gabbie Adner as Susanna (the Isabella character of Measure For Measure), Aaron Gibbs as Johnny Blood (Claudio of Measure For Measure), Christopher Karbo as Governor Von Richterhenkenpflightgetruber (Shakespeare’s Angelo), Daniel A. Stevens as Sheriff Martin Green (Duke Vincentio in Measure For Measure, with a bit of Lucio’s part too), Madison Miyuki Sprague as Bella Rose (a combination of Mariana and Juliet), and Jason Whitton as Father Morse (an expanded role of the two friars in Shakespeare’s play).

As the performance begins, Bella Rose presents a brief introduction, saying that this work was “adapted for your pleasure/From something called ‘Measure For Measure.’” She also makes reference to the fact that that work is considered “a problem play” and lets the audience know that they’ve cut out half the plot. It’s a funny way to get everyone on the same page with regards to expectations, and Madison Miyuki Sprague is adorable in her delivery. The dialogue of this play is presented in rhyming couplets, which works perfectly with the material and also makes it so the segues into the musical numbers are smooth and natural (something that is not always the case with musicals). For the first musical number, the actors hold frames in front of their faces with character designations at the bottom, such as “Sheriff” and “Governor,” further helping the audience know who is who from the outset, as well as helping set the time and place. By the end of that first number, Johnny Blood is in prison, where he is soon joined by an inebriated priest who no longer believes in the teachings of his own religion. His words of comfort offered to Johnny are: “There is no next life. Once we’re dead, we’re dead.” True words, but hilarious coming from a man of the cloth, and Jason Whitton does a wonderful job delivering them. The priest’s advice to Johnny is to “enjoy life while you can,” to which Johnny replies that he’s going to hang in two days.

Interestingly, when we first meet Susanna (who aims to become Sister Mary Jo), she is aiming a rifle at an annoying crow (well, perhaps not directly at the crow – her aim isn’t quite accurate), further showing that those in religion and government are perhaps less than sincere in their beliefs. Later she is even ready, perhaps eager, to kill a person. The Sheriff has come to see if she might plead on her brother Johnny’s behalf. At first, the most she offers to do is “pray for his immortal soul,” which of course is doing nothing at all, leading the Sheriff to sing, “The more I live, the more I see/Humankind ain’t kind,” and that justice isn’t just. Those lines certainly ring true today, when a convicted felon not only escaped any kind of justice, but managed to become President. Go figure. As the Sheriff sings, “That’s just how it is.” The Governor is clearly the villain of the piece. We know it immediately by his accent. And in his first song, he sings, “Someday they will thank me/For purging those who aren’t our cup of tea.” I know the Trump cult members will be unable to see themselves in those lines, and in this character (let’s face it, they probably don’t attend the theatre anyway), but it is very clear to those in the audience, even before the Governor adds, “Make Long Beach great again,” as he signs an audience member’s program. That line gets an appreciative laugh.

Susanna, like Isabella in Measure For Measure, is ready to give up her suit to the Governor quickly, until the Sheriff convinces her to try again. Then Susanna sings “Look In Your Heart” to him. It is when she gets down on her knees and touches his hand that something does stir within the Governor’s heart, though not quite what Susanna had in mind. Susanna is slow to catch on. When he flat-out tells her, “You must serve my passion for one night,” she responds innocently, “You want me to cook for you?” When she finally understands what he means, she is understandably upset and tells him he can’t do that. He announces that he’ll get away with this because of his position of power, and we in the audience can’t help but think he’s right since we’ve seen it happen in our time. Susanna tells him, “People like you, Governor, are why I turned my back on the world.” This is serious stuff, to be sure, but this is a comedy and there are plenty of laughs, as when the Governor attempts to get the audience on his side, accusing folks of being willing to do just what he’s doing were they in his position. But the audience was not so easily swayed.

One of the elements of Measure For Measure which leads to the work’s designation as a problem play is the bed trick, in which Mariana takes the place of Isabella in Angelo’s bed, unbeknownst to Angelo. However, in that play Mariana does have some claim to Angelo. In Desperate Measures, because Bella Rosa is both Mariana and Juliet (Claudio’s beloved), the bed trick has a somewhat different tone. Johnny encourages Susanna to try it, not realizing his own girlfriend will be the one to sleep with the Governor. One of the production’s best songs is “It Doesn’t Hurt To Try,” a funny number in which the Sheriff and Johnny appeal to Susanna to go forward with the plan. The saloon where Bella Rosa works, by the way, is called Wild Will’s, a little nod to Shakespeare. Bella Rosa herself delivers another entertaining number, going out into the audience and directly engaging with a few people, that itself having a very Shakespearean vibe. And her reaction to the bed trick proposition is hilarious, as she has not the slightest hesitation, and even mentions that she has the costumes at the ready. The Governor enters to a variation of that famous theme from Carmen. The music, by the way, is wonderful. The musicians are stationed upstage left, as there is no orchestra pit. And the actors all have strong voices, with a particularly excellent performance by Gabbie Adner. While the bed trick is normally an off-stage matter in Measure For Measure, in Desperate Measures we are treated to at least the beginning of it, as it presents the opportunity for quite a bit of comedy, including the trouble Susanna has in getting the Governor to agree to tending to the business with the lights off. Christopher Karbo is especially good here.

In this play the bed trick itself does not present a complete solution to the troubles, but instead complicates things further, as the Governor now believes himself in love with Susanna and refuses to honor the agreement to pardon her brother unless she marries him. His delivery of the line “Call me Otto” is hilarious and adorable. This leads to another plan, and so more wild shenanigans. Meanwhile, Johnny and Bella Rosa have a delightful musical number, “Just For You,” another of the production’s highlights. The play contains references to other Shakespeare plays, as when the Sheriff mentions Hamlet’s famous line to Horatio, and the Priest then delivers the line about there being more things in heaven and earth than are dreamt of in your philosophy. The Priest also quotes Henry The Fifth, saying “Once more unto the breach.” It’s interesting, because if these characters are aware of Shakespeare’s work, wouldn’t they then be aware of Measure For Measure, and find it odd that their situation paralleled those of that play’s characters? Well, no matter, for this is a completely enjoyable production, moving at a good pace and offering many laughs as well as a thing or two to think about.

This production of Desperate Measures was directed by Todd Nielsen, with musical direction by Daniel Gary Busby. It runs through March 9, 2025. Visit the theatre’s website for the full schedule. There is one intermission. International City Theatre is located at 330 E. Seaside Way in Long Beach, California.

Shakespeare Reference in Pulp Fiction

The actual screenplay for Pulp Fiction, written by Quentin Tarantino, does not contain any Shakespeare references, but the book’s foreword, by Manohla Dargis, does. Dargis writes, about Tarantino, “Like his idol, Jean-Luc Godard, the young writer-director is a pasticheur and pop-cultural relativist, as content to riff on Elvis as Pam Grier and Shakespeare.”

Pulp Fiction was published in 1994 through Miramax Books. My copy is a First Edition.

Shakespeare References in God Is Not Great

Christopher Hitchens’ God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything contains several Shakespeare references. The first couple are to Shakespeare himself. Hitchens writes, “We are not immune to the lure of wonder and mystery and awe: we have music and art and literature, and find that serious ethical dilemmas are better handled by Shakespeare and Tolstoy and Schiller and Dostoyevsky and George Eliot than in the mythical morality tales of the holy books” (p. 5).And then: “The next time I got married, which was by a Reform Jewish rabbi with an Einsteinian and Shakespearean bent, I had something a little more in common with the officiating person” (p. 16). A little later, he refers to King Lear: “Nothing optional – from homosexuality to adultery – is ever made punishable unless those who do the prohibiting (and exact the fierce punishments) have a repressed desire to participate. As Shakespeare put it in King Lear, the policeman who lashes the whore has a hot need to use her for the very offense for which he plies the lash” (p. 40). The book also contains a couple of references to Hamlet. Hitchens writes, “Ever since they were forced to take part in this argument, which they were with great reluctance, the religious have tried to echo Hamlet’s admonition to Horatio that there are more things in heaven and earth than are dreamed of by mere humans” (p. 80). And then: “‘What a piece of work is a man!’ as Hamlet exclaims, before going on to contradict himself somewhat by describing the result as a ‘quintessence of dust’; both statements having the merit of being true” (p. 85). He then mentions Shakespeare again: “It does not matter to me whether Homer was one person or many, or whether Shakespeare was a secret Catholic or a closet agnostic. I should not feel my own world destroyed if the greatest writer about love and tragedy and comedy and morals was finally revealed to have been the Earl of Oxford all along, though I must add that sole authorship is important to me and I would be saddened and diminished to learn that Bacon had been the man. Shakespeare has much more moral salience than the Talmud or the Koran or any account of the fearful squabbles of Iron Age tribes” (pages 150-151).

God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything was published in 2007. The copy I read (from the library) was published in 2009, and included a new afterword.

Shakespeare Study: Interesting Books Related To Hamlet

I suppose the two plays I return to the most often are King Lear and Hamlet. There is so much within each of those plays. However, this time I read books that were related to Hamlet without actually reading an edition of the play. Hamnet was a book that was highly recommended to me, and I was eager to get a copy. Soon after I received the recommendation, my girlfriend called me to say she picked up a copy for me. Before I’d finished reading it, we learned that a new book store had opened near us, and of course I immediately went to the Shakespeare section, where I found a copy of a book on Hamlet’s soliloquies. The third book I had had for a while, and this seemed the perfect time to dive into it.

Hamnet: A Novel Of The Plague by Maggie O’Farrell – This wonderful novel presents events both in the time of the plague, when Shakespeare’s son Hamnet died, which is the present time of the story, and the time from when William Shakespeare (who is never mentioned by name) met the woman he would marry, who is called Agnes rather than Anne. The author clearly knows her Shakespeare and her history, and we get the sense of that in some of the details she provides. She gives a different reason for William’s move to London, while playfully nodding to some of the notions put forward for his leaving Stratford-upon-Avon: “he is leaving for London because of some kind of disgrace” (p. 176). And she creates a plausible way that William became introduced to the theatre. The book also offers an explanation for that rather odd item in Shakespeare’s will. There are quoted passages from Hamlet at the beginning of both sections of this novel. And Agnes tells Judith, “No, my love, he will never come again” (p. 227), reminding us of Ophelia when she says, “He never will come again.” There is also a little nod to Macbeth, when William asks, “What if I fail?” and his wife replies, “Fail?” (p. 179). Before the end of the book, there is a performance of Shakespeare’s new play, Hamlet. This book was published in 2020.

Modern Hamlets & Their Soliloquies: An Expanded Edition by Mary Z. Maher – This fascinating book takes a look at how different actors handled the role of Hamlet, with a focus on their approach to the soliloquies. In the introduction, Maher writes: “Also, an actor is most convincing in delivering direct-address soliloquies if he has not developed close relationships with the other characters onstage, notably Horatio or Ophelia; thus it is logical for him to find support off the stage, with the theatre audience. Playing more humor in Hamlet’s overall character conception aids an actor when he decides to speak to the audience. The wit of the character persuades spectators to be receptive to his direct-address speeches” (p. xxvi). Regarding why the seventh soliloquy was traditionally cut, Maher writes: “After a series of brutal invasions of countries in the mid-twentieth century, Fortinbras took on the cast of a tyrant, and Hamlet, by identifying with him, would have been drawing inspiration from a marauder or despot. The performance meaning of the seventh soliloquy has changed over time in response to historical events” (p. xxvii). In the chapter on John Gielgud, Maher writes, “After World War II and Vietnam, it would become less and less popular to find inspiration in Fortinbras, and, in fact, his portrayal on the stage would become more and more brutal and dictatorial” (p. 14). In the chapter on David Warner, Maher writes: “Despite the closeness of sitting side by side throughout the proceedings, Warner showed unconcealed rancor toward the king and queen by literally shouting what is usually played as an aside, ‘A little more than kin, and less than kind’ (I.ii.65) at them” (p. 53). In that same chapter, regarding the first soliloquy, Maher writes: “Warner’s intention here was to finally express the bottled anger that had accumulated throughout the council scene. He did not use the soliloquy to bond with the audience, slowing down and wooing them with eye contact; he rather assumed their collusion and let off steam. The character established was a rebellious prince who did not respect authority” (p. 54). In the chapter on Ben Kingsley, Maher writes: “Kingsley overplayed the Pyrrhus speech to bait Polonius, who, of course, thought it very accomplished. Then the Player King, Bob Peck, completed the speech in a beautifully naturalistic and convincing way, crying at the end because he was so overwhelmed by the poetry of it. This choice helped to motivate Kingsley’s profound anger at himself in the forthcoming soliloquy” (p. 78). In that same chapter, Maher quotes Ben Kingsley, regarding the final soliloquy: “He came from the first soliloquy, where he said, ‘I cannot do it’ to here – now he’s controlling the play. Before, he’d been left alone on the stage and he’d panicked, he wanted to melt away, but now he asks others to leave the play because he wants a soliloquy. It is a very great journey from being terrified of being left alone to saying, I want to be left alone” (p. 88). In the chapter on David Rintoul, Maher quotes Rintoul: “Notice, by the way, how very few of the lines in any of Hamlet’s soliloquies are end-stopped: thoughts sweep on to the next lines, reinforcing his emotional and intellectual quickness” (p. 143). In the chapter on Kevin Kline, regarding Kline’s delivery of the first soliloquy, Maher writes: “Thus, the audience’s initial introduction was to a prince not rebellious or flippant but enmeshed in deepest grief. He then moved from melancholy to stunned anger” (p. 187). In that same chapter, Maher writes, “The short questions ‘Am I a coward?/Who calls me villain?’ were addressed to the imaginary audience of courtiers that would soon, in the play-within-the-play scene, surround the platform stage, but never to the ‘real’ audience in the Public/Anspacher Theater” (p. 189). Also in that chapter, Maher writes, “At a certain point in the performances, Diane Venora began to signal to Hamlet after ‘Are you honest?’ that there were observers behind the arras” (p. 192). In the Kenneth Branagh chapter, Maher quotes Branagh: “What struck us in filming was that no one got a decent funeral in the play – something that Laertes bemoaned later on for the lack of ostentation in his own family’s deaths. The requirement for a period of grieving (never mind the specifics of Hamlet’s particular circumstances), to fairly and squarely acknowledge and mourn the departure of a loved one, involved time, certainly more time than ‘A little month.’ The play seemed to cry out for that” (p. 207). And then in the next chapter, Maher quotes Simon Russell Beale: “Since his mother behaved badly, he assumes that is how all women behave. I don’t think he can have a decent human relationship once his father has given him the commission to kill Claudius. After that, all human relationships are gone, including the one with Horatio, which has been a remote relationship anyway, a gentlemanly one, not a fully fledged one. In a way, he’s got to get rid of Ophelia because he realizes that, consciously or unconsciously, she will be destroyed along with him” (p. 233). This book was published in 2003.

The Mystery Of Hamlet King Of Denmark Or What We Will by Percy Mackaye – This book contains four plays that lead up to the beginning of Shakespeare’s Hamlet, focusing on Hamlet’s father and uncle, and gives an account of what might have happened to Yorick and other characters along the way. Some of it is really quite interesting, and some of it doesn’t quite work with the text that Shakespeare has given us. It opens in a way similar to Shakespeare’s play. And in the prologue, King Hamlet is shown a scene from Hamlet, the scene where the Ghost shows himself to Hamlet. But that means that King Hamlet knows that his brother will murder him, which is odd. There are little nods to lines from Shakespeare’s play throughout this book. For example, King Hamlet says, “You are a woman, Gertrude,/And woman’s mind is frail” (p. 29), which reminds us of Hamlet’s line, “frailty, thy name is woman.” And a character called Gallucinius says, “Till all of Elsinore is dumb – and all/The rest is silence?” (p. 70). And there is this too: “Which shall it/Be, or not be?” (p. 128). Horatio is there, aged ten or so, telling King Hamlet of the prince playing with Yorick, which doesn’t work with two lines of Shakespeare’s play. The first is Horatio’s line to Hamlet, about Hamlet’s father, “I saw him once. He was a goodly king.” It doesn’t make sense if Horatio was around the king a good deal. Horatio is even listed as “aide to the King” (p. 297) in the third play of the book. The second is Hamlet’s line to Horatio, about Yorick, “I knew him, Horatio.” Hamlet wouldn’t say that if Horatio was there, if Horatio knew him too.  So it makes no sense for Horatio to be around Hamlet at so young an age. There is also a playful duel between Hamlet and Laertes when they’re children, which is just silly. And Laertes actually says, regarding the wooden swords they use, “This is too heavy; let me see another” (p. 135). And later Hamlet and Laertes argue at Yorick’s grave, over who loved him more, as they would do at Ophelia’s grave. This is ridiculous and forced. Also, young Prince Hamlet says, “And mighty Rome, and Julius Caesar’s death/Polonius taught us, because he acted it/At the university” (p. 155). So Hamlet already knew about that, and Polonius already knew that Hamlet knew? It just doesn’t make sense. Stuff like that made me frustrated with this book. On the other hand, there is some wonderful stuff about Gertrude’s connection to Ophelia. Gertrude is the one to name her, the name having come to her in a dream. Ophelia’s mother dies after giving birth, and interestingly even just after Ophelia’s birth, Gertrude imagines the girl will one day be with Hamlet. The book also makes clear Claudius and Gertrude’s relationship, and how their interest began before King Hamlet is murdered. It also establishes that there actually is a poisonous snake in King Hamlet’s garden. The book also contains a little nod to Caliban from The Tempest, and another nod to that play when Prince Hamlet says, “For I have dreamed thee, too. We are such stuff/As dreams are made on, and our little life/Is rounded with a sleep” (p. 520), Prospero’s words. Another thing that doesn’t feel right is that Hamlet and Horatio travel back to Denmark together while King Hamlet is still alive. Why would Hamlet be surprised then to see Horatio? Also, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern arrive, which makes no sense, as they also arrive in Hamlet, at the bidding of Claudius. King Hamlet goes a little mad in this story, which is interesting. Another thing that is odd in this telling is that Prince Hamlet does not want the throne, and is happy at hearing Claudius will rule, for he feels free then to be with Ophelia. Gertrude seems to wed Claudius right away, so not even a month passes after her husband’s death. The book ends with Act I Scene ii of Hamlet, but Claudius’ lines about Wittenberg are cut, as is Gertrude’s line “I pray thee, stay with us. Go not to Wittenberg.” This book was published in 1950.