Google Celebrates Shakespeare's Birthday (And Death Day)

It was four hundred years ago that William Shakespeare left this world, and no other writer since then has come close to having the sort of impact he continues to have. Google commemorates the occasion by changing the image on its home page to show a depiction of the bard and moments from several of his famous works, including Hamlet, Julius Caesar, Romeo And Juliet and A Midsummer Night's Dream.

Shakespeare References in The Letters Of Sigmund Freud

The correspondence of Sigmund Freud contains quite a few Shakespeare references. The Letters Of Sigmund Freud contains 315 letters written by Freud between 1873 and 1939. The book was edited by Ernst L. Freud, and the edition I read contains an introduction by Steven Marcus. Freud refers to Hamlet in several letters, as well as to Macbeth, King Lear, Romeo And Juliet and other Shakespeare plays.

He refers to Hamlet most often, which probably will come as no surprise, considering his field. In a letter from 1882, Freud writes: “Just because years ago at this season (owing to a miscalculation) Jerusalem had been destroyed I was to be prevented from speaking to my girl on the last day of my stay. ‘But what’s Hecuba to me?’ Jerusalem is destroyed and Marty and I are alive and happy” (p. 19). That’s a reference to Hamlet’s line, “What’s Hecuba to him, or he to Hecuba,” from one of his famous soliloquies. In a letter to Martha from 1885, Freud writes, “This we cannot do, and there’s the rub” (p. 156), a reference to another of his famous soliloquies. In a letter from 1907, answering a request for a list of ten good books, Freud writes: “You don’t say ‘the ten greatest works’ (of world literature), in which case, like so many other people, I should feel obliged to mention: Homer, the tragedies of Sophocles, Goethe’s Faust, Shakespeare’s Hamlet, Macbeth, etc.” (pages 268-269). In a letter from 1936 he writes, “Truth is unobtainable; humanity does not deserve it, and incidentally, wasn’t our Prince Hamlet right when he asked whether anyone would escape whipping if he got what he deserved?” (p. 430). And he ends a letter from 1938 by writing, “The rest – you will know what I mean – is silence” (p. 442), a reference to Hamlet’s last line.

He also refers to King Lear a few times. In a letter to Martha from 1883 he writes: “But this letter is not to Gardener Bunsow, rather to you, my Marty, my Cordelia-Marty. Why Cordelia? This will be explained later” (p. 40). Later in the same letter he writes: “And then I opened up and said: ‘This same Martha who at the moment has a sore throat in Dusternbrook, is in reality a sweet Cordelia, and we are already on terms of the closest intimacy and can say anything to each other.’ Whereupon he said he too always calls his wife by that name because she is incapable of displaying affection to others, even including her own father. And the ears of both Cordelias, the one of thirty-seven and the other of twenty-two, must have been ringing while we were thinking of them with serious tenderness” (p. 41). In a letter from 1930, Freud writes: “I thank you for kindly sending me your translation of King Lear, which gave me the opportunity of rereading this powerful work” (p. 395). He then continues: “As to your question whether one is justified in considering Lear a case of hysteria, I should like to say that one is hardly entitled to expect from a poet a clinically correct description of a mental illness. It should be enough that our feelings are at no point offended and that our so-called popular psychiatry enables us to follow the person described as abnormal in all his deviations. This is the case with Lear; we are not shocked when, in his sorrow, he abandons contact with reality, nor when, clinging to the trauma, he indulges in phantasies of revenge; nor when, in his excess of passion, he storms and rages, although the picture of a consistent psychosis is disrupted by such behavior. As a matter of fact I am not sure whether such hybrid formations of an affective clinging to a trauma and a psychotic turning away from it do not occur often enough in reality. The fact that he calms down and reacts normally when he realizes he is safely protected by Cordelia doesn’t seem to me to justify a diagnosis of hysteria” (p. 395).

As for Macbeth, in a letter from 1878 he writes, “I am also sending you herewith my collected works, not my complete ones as I have reason to suspect, for I am awaiting the correction of a third, and a fourth and fifth keep appearing in my prescient mind, which is startled by them like Macbeth by the ghosts of the English kings: ‘What! Will the line stretch out to the crack of doom?’” (p. 6).

He also refers to Twelfth Night. In a letter from 1882 he writes: “Remember the words of an Anglo-Saxon poet who invented many gay and sad plays and himself acted in them, one William Shakespeare: ‘Journeys end in lovers meeting,/Every wise man’s son doth know’ and how he goes on to ask: ‘What is love? ‘tis not hereafter;/Present mirth hath present laughter;/What’s to come is still unsure:/In delay there lies no plenty;/Then come kiss me, sweet and twenty,/Youth’s a stuff will not endure.’ But should you not understand these frolicsome lines, consult none other than A.W. Schlegel’s translation of Twelfth Night; or, What You Will” (p. 13).

Freud wrote about The Merchant Of Venice, and in a letter from 1913, he refers to his work: “My closest companion will be my little daughter, who is developing very well at the moment (you will long ago have guessed the subjective condition for the ‘Choice of the Three Caskets’” (p. 301). Freud’s work was actually titled The Theme of The Three Caskets, referring to Portia’s suitors having to choose from three caskets. And he refers to Romeo And Juliet in a letter from 1934: “Our attitude to the two political possibilities for Austria’s future can only be summed up in Mercutio’s line in Romeo And Juliet: ‘A plague on both your houses’” (p. 420). And in the list of addressees, Richard Flatter is described, in part, as a “translator of Shakespeare into German” (p. 465).

This book was published in 1960. The edition I read is from 1975.

As You Like It (2010) DVD Review

This As You Like It captures a performance of the play at in 2009 The Globe, with a tremendous cast, including Naomi Frederick, Jack Laskey, Laura Rogers and Dominic Rowan. It was directed for the stage by Thea Sharrock, and the film was directed by Kriss Russman. The performance begins with an added ceremony of Duke Frederick being crowned.

Act I

Orlando (Jack Laskey) delivers the opening speech partly to Adam (Trevor Martin), but also to the audience and at moments directly into one of the cameras. After Orlando’s “I have as much of my father in me as you,” Oliver (Jamie Parker) rushes him and the two wrestle. The two continue to wrestle through the next several lines until Adam breaks it up with his line.

After Orlando, then Oliver and Adam exit, this production goes right to the second scene with the entrances of Rosalind (Naomi Frederick) and Celia, skipping (for the moment) everything with Dennis and Charles. Touchstone (Dominic Rowan) enters and believes he’s not seen by Celia or Rosalind, but when Celia (Laura Rogers) says “this fool,” she motions behind her where Touchstone stands, a wonderful little moment. When Celia, Rosalind, Touchstone and Le Beau exit, we then go back to the first scene for the dialogue between Charlies and Oliver, an interesting choice, for now when Charles speaks of Celia’s love for Rosalind, we’ve already met both of them. Then when Oliver gives his last speech about hating Orlando, Orlando has entered stage left, getting ready to wrestle, so Oliver can indicate him during his speech. However, they both then exit, which makes Orlando’s entrance there seem contrived and pointless. After all, we know to whom Oliver is referring without Orlando having to be present. Then we return to the second scene with Duke Frederick, Rosalind, Celia and Le Beau entering, and Orlando entering separately upstage left. The wrestling match begins on the stage, but part of it occurs among the groundlings. Le Beau says, “indeed the shorter is his daughter,” cutely rhyming “shorter” and “daughter.” Rosalind and Celia appear to be close to the same height in this production, with Celia maybe an inch or two shorter.

Celia’s line about her father having “eyes full of anger” is cut.

Act II

As Duke Senior (Philip Bird) delivers his first speech, one of the lords softly plays an acoustic guitar. Amiens also speaks the First Lord’s lines, as well as those of the Second Lord. So “We did, my lord” becomes “I did, my lord.” He also says “I’ll lead you to him straight” rather than “I’ll bring you to him straight.”

In the second scene, Le Beau takes the place of the two lords.

Just before the third scene begins, Oliver appears above on the balcony, in order to place the scene at his home. Orlando is about to go in, but Adam’s “But do not so” stops him. And that leads to a tender moment between Adam and Orlando. Adam is particularly good here.

Touchstone, like Rosalind and Celia, has changed his clothes. After his “Ay, now am I in Arden,” he pretends to be excited, running around, admiring a tree and so on, until he steps in something less admirable. Then he finishes the line, “the more fool I.” And then, funnily, he pulls out his fool’s head staff, and it too has changed clothes to match Touchstone, a nice touch. Rosalind is really well cast, and is believable while dressed in male attire.

Amiens is accompanied by guitar on his song. Jaques (Tim McMullan) delivers his “More, more” in a sweetly sarcastic tone and from a seat by the audience. He then reaches the stage by “Well then, if ever I thank any man, I’ll thank you.” When Amiens asks him about “ducdame,” Jacques adds “It’s Greek” before delivering the line as written. And on “fools into a circle,” he indicates the audience at the Globe.

Orlando and Adam enter from the audience.

Jaques plays on the sexual joke of the “thereby hangs a tale” speech. Orlando enters above, then climbs down to demand food. Jaques sticks a piece of fruit at the end of Orlando’s drawn dagger, a funny touch. On “whining schoolboy,” Jaques indicates a boy in the audience. After “sans everything,” Jaques exits into the audience.

Act III

Duke Frederick pushes Oliver in. Oliver is in a torn and bloodied shirt, barefoot and weak, an extreme change in fortunes. This is great, for it helps to make more believable his later change of heart.

Orlando tosses some of his pages into the audience. The dialogue between Touchstone and Corin is wonderful. And when Touchstone adds his own poetry, he playfully dances across the stage. The poem that Celia reads is cut in half, ending with “Heaven would in little show.” In this production, it seems that Rosalind at first really has no idea who wrote the poems. Celia is great in this scene, as is Rosalind, particularly when she quickly asks her series of questions. Rosalind takes a moment after Orlando’s “Neither rhyme nor reason can express how much” before delivering her line about love being madness – and in that moment we can see that she now believes in Orlando’s love, and we can see her happiness. It’s such a great moment, and she is so good. After Rosalind and Celia exit, Orlando remains behind briefly and says, “Rosalind,” which is not in the play.

The intermission comes at the end of this scene.

Touchstone enters through the stage’s trap door and dances to the musicians who entertain during the intermission, and that leads to his lines in the third scene. Jaques is among the audience. Touchstone asks the audience, “Is the single man therefore blessed,” waits for a response, then contradicts the crowd, “No!” Sir Oliver speaks with a stutter.

Silvius (Michael Benz) reads from a piece of paper, “The common executioner…” On Rosalind’s “Down on your knees,” Phebe (Jade Williams) quickly, eagerly gets on her knees. Both Phebe and Silvius are really good.

Act IV

Rosalind, in the heat of the moment, says “And I am your Rosalind” in all honesty, nearly giving up the game, but that Celia quickly mends the situation with her next line. A wonderful moment. After Rosalind’s “I do take thee, Orlando, for my husband,” they kiss. It’s clear that she knows they are in fact married at this point. And it seems that Orlando realizes she is really Rosalind.

Scene 2 is cut, so that as Rosalind and Celia are exiting, Silvius rushes in and catches them before they go. Silvius grabs the letter and reads aloud the last portion, rather than Rosalind reading it all, as he realizes what it means. It makes us feel more strongly for Silvius. When Oliver tells the story of Orlando’s deeds, Celia and Rosalind’s lines are cut, a cut which then renders his “Twice did he turn his back and purpos’d so” nonsensical, as it is in response to Rosalind’s question. But I do love Oliver’s delivery of “And found it was his brother, his elder brother,” with a quiet shame entering his voice. After Rosalind faints, as Oliver helps her up, he in doing so inadvertently touches her chest, and quickly removes his hands. Clearly, he knows something is up.

Act V

Touchstone and Audrey’s first lines from Scene 3 are delivered at the end of Scene 1.

Because Oliver has felt Rosalind’s chest, his “And you, fair sister” has a stronger meaning. And the line causes Rosalind to pause briefly. Also, it gives clear meaning to Orlando’s “Ay, and greater wonders than that.” Rosalind’s line about the magician is cut. She goes from “strange things” to “If you do love Rosalind.” The second line about the magician is likewise cut.

The lines about the bargain from Scene 4 are added to Scene 2. So from Scene 2 we go to partway into Scene 4, beginning with Duke Senior’s “I do remember in this shepherd boy/Some lively touches of my daughter’s favor.” Hymen speaks his first lines from within the audience. It is Le Beau who delivers the lines about Duke Frederick’s sudden conversation. And so Duke Senior says “Welcome, Le Beau” instead of “Welcome, young man.” Music starts, and Jaques’ “by your patience” stops it. Jaques says “What you would crave” rather than “What you would have,” presumably to keep the rhyme intact with current pronunciation. After “delights,” there is a dance. After the dance the cast remains on stage, and Rosalind delivers the epilogue. On “If I were a woman,” she lifts her dress to reveal the trouser she wore when disguised as Ganymede. And the entire cast bows with her.

Time: approximately 147 minutes

The DVD includes a photo gallery of the cast members.

Tempest Redux (2016 Production) Theatre Review

John Farmanesh-Bocca’s new adaptation of William Shakespeare’s The Tempest, titled Tempest Redux, takes the play in a different and intriguing direction, while still using the text. In the First Folio, The Tempest is the first play presented, and it is listed under the Comedies. In the first version of the complete works that I read, The Yale Shakespeare, it is the last play presented, and it is listed under Tragedies. Without giving too much away, let’s just say that this production could fit well in either position.

As the audience enters, there is the sound of sea gulls and of waves lapping the shore. As for the set, there are a few rocks at corners of the stage, and a few tree stumps as well. A small model of a boat is placed downstage center. Several minutes before the play begins, Prospero (Jack Stehlin) enters and stands upstage center, facing away from the audience. And while the house lights remain on, the other characters enter and assume meditative postures on stage, seated cross-legged with their hands open upon their knees. When the play starts, some simple yet very effective lighting and sound effects simulate the storm. Prospero holds the model of the ship up, a great way of showing that he is orchestrating the storm, with the help of Ariel. Ariel in this production (as in many productions) is female, and (unlike any other production I’ve ever seen) is actually played by three actors (Shea Donovan, Briana Price, Emily Yetter). The Ariels surround Prospero downstage during the tempest, while the other characters react upstage and deliver the Act I Scene 1 lines. It is well choreographed, and is a wonderful, imaginative and effective way of presenting the storm and opening this play.

When Miranda enters, Prospero seems tired from the energy he expended in causing the storm, a very nice touch. When Prospero tells Miranda about their voyage to the island, Miranda sits cross-legged, adopting the same posture as the others did before the play started. And the tale Prospero tells is acted out by the other characters (he is handed his books, and so on). Ariel’s voice is done in an unusual way – it is played over speakers to give it a louder and eerier feel (while the three actors also speak the lines). On Ariel’s line “My liberty,” the three women surround Prospero. The three tree stumps function as the prisons for the three Ariels. Prospero gives a somewhat playful, even a bit goofy, delivery of some lines. There are certain signs that he is perhaps a bit unhinged.

Gildart Jackson is really good as Alonso when he is overcome with drowsiness. Interestingly, when Antonio (Dennis Gersten) says that if Alonso and Gonzalo (renamed Adrian in this production, a combination of the two roles of Gonzalo and Adrian) were dead they’d be no worse than they are, Alonso moves just a bit in his sleep, a nice touch. The characters have daggers, not swords, in this production, though they still refer to them as swords. There are two moments when characters move forward to do something not written in the play and are stopped by the three Ariels, who then are able to reverse time. Both times it is to prevent characters from doing violence, from doing something Shakespeare did not have them do. It’s almost as if the characters are getting out of line, and the three Ariels are working on Shakespeare’s behalf, to bring them back to the play, to have them serve Shakespeare’s desires and not their own.

In addition to three Ariels, this production has two men playing Caliban, a strange choice. Both men also play other roles – Sebastian and Adrian. As Caliban, they work in conjunction, on each other’s shoulders and sharing lines and so on. The spectacle of this takes a bit away from the sympathy we might have for the character. And because of the well-choreographed movements of the two men, Caliban doesn’t seem as weak or vulnerable, and certainly not as alone. It is a bit distracting, as there is the question of how the other characters see Caliban – as one entity or as two men. For when Trinculo is under the tarp with both Calibans, Stephano still delivers his line as “four legs,” not six. And interestingly, the two Calibans are facing opposite ways, with Trinculo lying across the two of them, so that when Stephano lifts each end of the tarp, he sees a head of Caliban. And because Caliban is two men, it makes their calling him a monster seem less cruel and silly, and more accurate. By the way, as you might expect, the roles of Trinculo and Stephano provide a lot of laughs. These roles are handed really well by Dennis Gerten (who doubles as Antonio) and Gildart Jackson (who doubles as Alonso). I love the little pause that Stephano adds after “I prithee now lead the way” before “without any more talking.” There are a lot of nice touches like that.

Mimi Davila is really good as Miranda in the scene where she first sees Ferdinand, with the right amount of youthful innocence and excitement in her delivery of lines like “I might call him/A thing divine.” There is a bit of silly business accompanying Prospero’s “Put thy sword up,” with Prospero causing Ferdinand’s arm to extend straight up into the air and to remain like that under Prospero’s power. And both Ferdinand and Miranda are adorable in their next scene when Ferdinand is going about the tasks given him by Prospero. Though Ferdinand’s “I do think a king” is spoken with happiness, when that line should be touched with sadness, for what he’s saying is that he thinks his father is dad. And the pageant scene is done in an interesting and imaginative way, taking place basically in the minds of Ferdinand and Miranda, with the aid of Prospero and the three Ariels and some images projected on the back screen. It’s actually a sweet and pretty moment.

This production does include quite a few cuts and some re-ordering of scenes as well. For example, the most famous speech of the play comes at a different time. And because of the doubling up of roles, Caliban, Trinculo and Stephano are not present at the climax. But the way the last scene is handled will certainly cause you to think about the play and these characters, particularly Prospero, in a new way.

The production is approximately an hour and a half, without intermission. It runs through April 10, 2016. The show I saw was the final preview, so it’s possible that some more tweaking has occurred in the meantime. Tempest Redux was adapted and directed by John Farmanesh-Bocca. The Odyssey Theatre is a 99-seat theatre located at 2055 South Sepulveda Blvd. in Los Angeles. There is a small parking lot in the front, and the cost to park there is $4, but I had no trouble finding a spot on the street.

Shakespeare Study: The Tragedy Of King Lear (revisited)

Initially, my Shakespeare study was a three-year project (well, three and a half years), in which I read one play each month (and then the poems and sonnets and apocrypha), and watched as many film versions as I could find. But of course I keep acquiring new DVDs and books, and so revisit each of the plays. This time it’s The Tragedy Of King Lear, which is one of the greatest works of literature, along with The Tragedy Of Hamlet.

This time around I read The New Penguin edition, which was edited by G.K. Hunter. It was originally published in 1972; the copy I read was from 1988, and includes a fifty-page introduction. In the introduction, G.K. Hunter writes, “King Lear is certainly a play in which everything is at full stretch: extremes of cruelty and suffering face extremes of loyalty and self-sacrifice” (p. 7). Regarding earlier versions of the story, Hunter writes, “In all versions other than Shakespeare’s there is a happy ending” (p. 9). Regarding identity, Hunter writes: “Lear asserts, in his sanity, that he cannot tell who he is, for the defining family relationship is denied by his daughters. In the mad scenes it is not only the relationship between a man and his family that he finds denied; it is the whole sequence of loyalties, duties, and respects that everywhere in Shakespeare describes the final good” (pages 13-14). And then: “The relationship between man and beast, the potential for bestiality in man, is constantly referred to by the imagery…This is why it is the idea of Edgar’s nakedness (however it was represented in the theatre of Shakespeare’s day) that gives the final impulse to Lear’s madness” (p. 14). Regarding Lear and Cordelia, Hunter writes: “It has often been remarked that Lear’s refusal to listen to Cordelia in Act I, scene 1, finds its mirror-image in Act V, scene 3, where her voice ‘soft,/Gentle and low’ is the only thing in the world he is listening for, and where her silence is his executioner” (p. 26). About the end, Hunter writes: “It is only in the dream of art that one really recovers that which is lost. What Edgar can find at the end of the play is only the debris of the world which exploded in Act I. The only wisdom that is available to him at the end is the knowledge of insufficiency: ‘we that are young/Shall never see so much nor live so long’” (p. 36). Hunter also writes, “The process of the play see-saws between hope and disappointment; and any sense of values that the play is supposed to affirm must be held against this background of recurrent betrayal” (pages 38-39).

The notes in this edition are at the end of the play rather than at the bottom of the pages, and there are no indications in the text for when a related note is included. A note on Lear’s “Although our last and least” reads: “least littlest (or perhaps, as youngest, ‘last in precedence’). Cordelia’s low stature may be implied elsewhere (for example line 198 of this scene). The Q reading, ‘last, not least’, is easier, but the text may have been remembered in this form because of the very triteness of the phrase” (p. 189). Regarding Lear’s line “Hence and avoid my sight,” Hunter notes, “addressed, presumably to Cordelia; but it appears that she does not obey, and that Lear accepts this, since he calls for France and Burgundy” (p. 190). A note on France’s “dismantle/So many folds of favour” reads “strip away the protective clothing of your favour (the first appearance of the idea of stripping clothes, later so important in the play)” (pages 194-195). Regarding Lear’s use of the word “bandy” in “Do you bandy looks with me, you rascal,” Hunter notes: “The technical term for a stroke in tennis. The dialogue following picks up the tennis metaphor; from ‘bandying’ looks, Lear turns to blows. Oswald objects to being made a tennis-ball; Kent trips him and says that football, a plebian game, is more suitable for him than tennis, a royal and noble game” (p. 207). Regarding the Fool’s line “Whoop, Jug, I love thee,” Hunter notes: “perhaps the refrain from a lost song. Obviously it repudiates the involvement with others which appears in the preceding line. Jug Joan” (p. 212). Regarding Edmund’s “Fled this way,” Hunter notes, “As the eighteenth-century editor Capell said, Edmund should point in the wrong direction” (p. 220). Regarding Gloucester’s “O madam, my old heart is cracked; it’s cracked,” Hunter notes: “The repetition suggests the sentimental self-pity that is a part of Gloucester’s basic temperament. Compare lady, lady (line 92) and too bad, too bad (line 95)” (p. 222). Regarding Gloucester’s “I know not, madam” and Edmund’s “Yes, madam,” Hunter writes: “Gloucester’s response to Regan’s efforts to blame her father is not very satisfactory; he is too sunk in self-pity to catch her drift. It is Edmund, with his clear eye for the main chance, who gives her the reply she wants, thus establishing at first sight the natural rapport between them” (p. 222). A note on the Fool’s “This is a brave night to cool a courtesan” reads “It is not clear why the comment on the weather takes this form. Perhaps a pun is intended on ‘night’/‘knight’. If so, this would explain the sudden switch to medieval parody in the lines following” (p. 246). Regarding Lear’s “Didst thou give all to thy daughters,” Hunter notes: “the first words that can be used to prove that Lear has finally lost his hold on external reality, is ‘mad’. The appearance of ‘Poor Tom’ is undoubtedly intended to be the catalyst that releases the inner forces that have been beating in Lear’s mind. Immediately after the Poor naked wretches speech he finds a figure with whom he can wholly identify himself and whose role (of madman) he can take over” (pages 250-251). Regarding Edgar’s “O do, de, do, de, do, de,” Hunter writes, “This set of sounds is probably meant to represent Tom’s teeth chattering with cold” (p. 251). Regarding Regan’s “pray you give him this,” Hunter notes: “Some commentators assume that she gives a love-token rather than a letter. Certainly only one letter is clearly mentioned when Oswald dies – that from Gonerill; but it may be implied that he was carrying more than one… one given by Regan at this point is not ruled out” (p. 281). Regarding Lear’s “And my poor fool is hanged,” Hunter notes: “Presumably Cordelia is meant (since she is the centre of his attention, and was hanged), ‘poor fool’ being a common Shakespearian form of parental endearment. It is impossible to know if the reminiscence of the Fool’s title is accidental or intentional. It has been suggested that the same boy actor played both parts; but the Fool is likely to have been played by Robert Armin” (p. 311). And regarding Lear’s “no life,” Hunter writes, “I take it that Lear is making a general point (‘Let all life cease’) rather than the particular one: ‘There is no life left in Cordelia’” (p. 311). And regarding Lear’s “Pray you undo this button,” Hunter writes: “presumably the button at his own throat, which seems to be causing his feeling of suffocation. But it could equally well be a button on Cordelia’s garment” (p. 311).

Related Books:

King Lear: Before During After by Ben Crystal  -  This is a volume in The Arden Shakespeare’s Springboard Shakespeare series, and functions as an introduction as well as study guide for students and those who are new to the play. Ben Crystal writes: “The heath scenes, out in the wilds of Nature, sit at the heart of the play. The words nature, natural and unnatural occur 50 times and over the course of the action we see children betray and rule over their parents, moving against the natural way of things” (p. 6). About the area of Kent in England, Crystal writes: “a beautiful county in the seat of south-east England, and the closest part of the country to France; its position and strength in times of war a possible character note for Kent; the county was singular in England in that it held the common law of gavelkind, where lands were divided equally among heirs – is Lear intentionally adopting the laws of the territory of his most loyal subject?” (p. 23). About the Fool, Crystal writes: “His sudden absence is often explained by the arrival of Poor Tom. Lear, drowning in madness, can no longer hear the Fool’s wisdom, instead cleaving to Tom’s ramblings; so realising he is of no further use, the Fool leaves. Some productions have him captured by soldiers and hanged, as war breaks out (first between Albany and Cornwall; then with Cordelia’s French army)” (p. 29). Ben Crystal goes through the play scene by scene, with notes on the characters, actions and even specific words. Regarding Regan in Act IV scene iv, Crystal writes: “Using all the tricks of persuasion at her disposal in an effort to see the letters, productions have had Regan try to seduce Oswald into submission. There’s a lovely shift in the way she talks to him too, moving in one speech from the formal you to the informal thou” (p. 71). Regarding Cordelia’s line “And so I am, I am” in Act IV scene vii, Crystal writes: “These last repeated extra syllables are a point of contention. Some consider them a mistake, others agree that the shared line intentionally extends the metre, Cordelia’s emotions fittingly breaking past the confines of the poetic style” (p. 77). Regarding Edgar’s Act V line “Ripeness is all,” Crystal notes, “echoing Hamlet’s fifth act line The readiness is all” (p. 81). Regarding the effects of Lear’s absent wife, Crystal writes, “As Lear’s wife gave him no son and therefore no direct heir to the throne, this may have given rise to his breaking up of the country at the beginning of the play” (p. 92). Crystal provides this side-note: “Shakespeare’s younger brother came to London, worked as an actor, died two years after King Lear was written, and was buried in Southwark Cathedral, a few minutes’ walk from the Globe. Father to an illegitimate son named Edward and 16 years Shakespeare’s junior, he was christened Edmund. Whether the character of Edmund was written as a compliment – or an insult – to him has been a source of great debate and we’ll never know, but the parallels fascinate biographers” (p. 96). King Lear: Before During After was published in 2013.

The King And I  by Philippa Kelly  -  This is a volume in the Shakespeare Now! series. In this book, Philippa Kelly relates King Lear to her experiences and life in Australia, and to the Australian identity. Regarding the play’s first scene, Kelly writes: “The old man, Lear, has had, in abundance, all that the world can offer. What he most wants now is for his beloved youngest daughter to declare – publicly, so he can believe it – that she loves him. He offers her the greatest measure he possesses (the kingdom of England, the finest slice), and he expects to become a dependent, or even a babe again, in the warmth of her ‘kind nursery’ (1.1.122). He is utterly unprepared for her rebuke” (p. 12). Then Kelly adds, “And in the course of the next several scenes he becomes physically naked, needy, left out in the cold – until, at his lowest ebb, he is embraced by his youngest daughter, who returns chastened from France to give him the very solace he had wanted in the first place” (p. 13). Kelly writes, “No matter what else King Lear is about, banishment is fundamental to its emotional plumbing” (p. 28). Regarding Edgar, Kelly writes: “But Poor Tom is also at odds with himself: he is in fact Edgar, Lear’s wealthy godson, who claims in this figure of the madman a cover for, and an image of, his lonely, rejected self. Edgar, like the madman, is banished. But unlike the madman, he is entirely aware of an alternative ‘true’ identity; he has somewhere else that is his ‘real’ upper-class life away from the heath” (p. 36). Regarding the idea of dispossession, Kelly writes, “Dispossession, for Lear, is not just about a kingdom: it involves pain, indignity and humiliation, and it rehearses the unavoidable dispossession to come in death” (p. 63). Going back to that important first scene, Kelly writes: “Lear demands that his daughters give him expressions of love in return for portions of his kingdom. What he wants here is acknowledgement – he just doesn’t know how to ask for it, and so he barters ridiculously with pieces of land” (p. 66). Kelly adds, “Lear’s kingdom and his identity fall apart because he cannot accept the words Cordelia gives him as a substitute for the acknowledgement he wants” (p. 66). The King And I was published in 2011.

Lear’s Fool: I Will Not Go To Bed At Noon  by Joseph Gergen  -  Lear’s Fool: I Will Not Go To Bed At Noon is a play, presented in prose in two acts, focusing on the Fool from King Lear. Most of the other characters from Shakespeare’s play are here as well, the exception being King Lear himself. The title, of course, comes from the Fool’s famous last line, “And I’ll go to bed at noon.” This play starts five years before the events of King Lear, with Edgar, Edmund and the Fool in Paris, studying. So in this version, the Fool is a young character, not Lear’s age as in some productions of King Lear. Edgar’s first line to his brother is “You annoying bastard” (p. 1), a none-too-subtle joke on Edmund’s status. Edgar soon indicates he doesn’t trust Edmund, calling him a snake. However, in Shakespeare’s play, Edgar readily believes Edmund’s tale. In that first scene Edgar also says, “I’ll not go about begging,” playfully foreshadowing Edgar’s Poor Tom disguise. The Fool is just about to take over the job as King Lear’s Fool, which means he has that job for only five years. And in this version, they make it clear that the Fool is smitten with Cordelia. The second scene is four years later, and so one year before the events in Shakespeare’s play. And in the third scene, Regan complains that Cordelia crawls out of bed at noon, drawing a humorous connection between Cordelia and the Fool (some people believe the two roles in King Lear were originally played by the same actor). By the fifth scene, we are brought up to the time of the play, with the Fool at a bar lamenting the fact that Lear is dividing up his kingdom and giving it away. Edmund says: “The King no longer needs a fool. He has taken that job himself” (p. 29), which of course is one of the theories regarding the Fool’s sudden departure from King Lear. This play makes explicit Cordelia’s reasoning behind her refusal to play along with Lear’s demand: “I have thrown away my kingdom because I was too stubborn to flatter an old man. A white lie to ease his last days. Who would have objected? I could have cared for him and watched over him. But no. I had to choose that moment to stand up to him, to make a statement, to assert my independence. I thought I had to teach the old man a lesson on life. As if I could teach him. As if I had lived long enough to understand the complexities of life, to know what it might be like to need some harmless flattery to keep one’s humanity” (p. 43). The Fool says to Gloucester, “Even you’re not so blind to the fact that something must be done” (p. 48), a play on Gloucester’s impending torture. At one point the Fool makes mention that this is a play: “The King is a child again, which is ridiculous. I should be the only child in this play” (p. 57). Disguises don’t quite function the way they do in Shakespeare’s world. Oswald sees through Kent’s disguise (p. 67), and the Fool sees through both Kent’s disguise (p. 71) and Edgar’s disguise (p. 77). The Fool’s last line is referred to again: “You all thought I would go to bed at noon, but I have made it to dusk” (p. 86). (There is also a Beatles reference: “And here I stand. A fool on the hill,” p. 93.)  Lear’s Fool: I Will Not Go To Bed At Noon was published in 2011.

King Lear  by William Shakespeare  -  This book is a volume in the Pocket Classics series, famous works of literature presented in comic book form. Twelve of Shakespeare’s plays were thus presented. Though William Shakespeare is credited as the author of this book, his lines have been changed, and as a result sometimes the meaning is changed as well. For example, the last speech of the play is given as: “Yes, I will rule this land. And nothing like this shall ever happen again!” That’s not exactly what Edgar is saying in the play. No other writer is credited; nor is the artist credited.

Act I

The map is held up by two men. Cordelia’s asides are presented as thoughts, such as “If my father doesn’t know I love him, then I can’t help it!” (p. 14). Lear’s “Nothing will come of nothing” becomes “Nothing will get you nothing” (p. 15). In this version, Lear gives Kent just five days to be out of the kingdom. In the play Kent is given five days to provision himself, and he must leave on the sixth day, and won’t face death unless he is still in the kingdom “on the tenth day following.” Kent’s disguise is merely a hooded cloak. The Fool is present, but all of his lines from the first act are cut.

Act II

Kent hits Oswald in the head with the flat of his sword. Scene 3 is cut. This version offers a little explanation: “While Kent had been left in the stocks, King Lear arrived at Regan’s castle. Finding her gone, he went to Gloucester’s” (p. 36). Some of the most famous and important lines are cut, such as Lear’s “O reason not the need.”

Act III

Interestingly, the first scene of the third act is left in, a scene that is often cut. But then cut is Lear’s “Blow, winds, and crack your cheeks.” It oddly goes from scene 1 to scene 3, losing scene 2 completely, which is one of the famous scenes and includes Lear’s “I am a man/More sinn’d against than sinning.” Instead, we go to scene 4, with Kent urging Lear inside. The Fool’s famous last line is cut. Gloucester’s blinding is not depicted in any extreme detail. The line “Let him smell his way to Dover” is left in.

Act IV

Scene 3 is cut, as is scene 5. Edgar doesn’t describe himself as a demon for Gloucester, but instead simply says, “I saw you fall! It is a miracle that you are still alive!” (p. 48).

Act V

Goneril’s aside, “I’d rather lose the battle than lose Edmund to her” (p. 52), is delivered as a thought, as is her “If not, I’ll never trust medicine again!” (p. 55). Edgar wears a helmet hiding his face. Cut are the lines where Lear thinks Cordelia might yet live. His last line is “never, never, never, never, never” (p. 60). As I mentioned, Edgar speaks the last lines, which are: “Yes, I will rule this land. And nothing like this shall ever happen again!” (p. 61)

King Lear was published in 1984.

Shakespeare And Outsiders  by Marianne Novy  -  This book discusses various characters who are treated as outsiders in Shakespeare’s plays. There are chapters on The Merchant Of Venice, Twelfth Night, Othello and King Lear. In the introduction, Novy writes, “Lear also moves into madness while his age becomes a mark of weakness rather than authority, and he becomes an economic outsider in his homelessness” (p. 3). And then in the chapter on King Lear, Novy writes: “While Lear is wrong to believe that Poor Tom’s poverty comes from his daughters’ cruelty, the homelessness of the character who plays Poor Tom does come from family members’ actions, and Lear’s intuition hints at an analogy between the responsibility of family members for one another and the responsibility of the rich for the poor” (p. 122). Regarding Edmund, Novy writes, “In the first conversation of the play, Gloucester marks his son Edmund as an outsider, by focusing on the embarrassing circumstances of his birth, and attempts to dismiss him” (p. 122). And about poverty, Novy writes, “Poverty in Shakespeare’s day was marked, among other ways, by the increased visibility of bastards, elderly poor, and beggars – represented in Lear by three characters who most thoroughly play the role of outsiders, Edmund, Lear, and Edgar” (p. 124). And again about Edmund, Novy writes: “He does not want to share the family inheritance of land with Edgar, just as he does not want to be seen as just as good as everybody else. He wants to reverse the hierarchy and take the land” (p. 127). Relating Edmund to Othello’s Emilia, particularly in the change toward goodness, Novy writes: “But while Emilia’s outburst is crucial to the resolution of the plot, the major effect of Edmund’s conversion, in the context of the play, is its futility, since it comes too late. Yet, when he dies soon after, Albany’s epitaph, ‘That’s but a trifle here’ (5.3.295), may seem inadequate. Though understandable given Edmund’s relationship with Goneril, it echoes too much of the neglect of Edmund that Gloucester showed at the beginning of the play” (p. 130). Regarding King Lear, Novy writes: “When Lear goes to the heath he dramatizes and intensifies his position as an outsider. Lear’s calling to the winds in Act 3 Scene 2 could be seen as a parallel to Edmund’s addressing Nature as his goddess – both seeking alliance with nature as opposed to humans – in their struggle partly with humans in their family” (p. 131). Also regarding Lear, Novy writes: “He now sees the deference given to a king as no more than the caution a beggar shows in running from a dog. The institutions of his society that are supposed to bring justice now look to him simply like the rule of the rich over the poor” (p. 133). About Goneril and Regan, Novy writes, “Shakespeare gives neither of them a soliloquy, makes them seem less isolated than Edmund by doubling them, and makes Lear’s behaviour to them seem less negligent, if more manipulative, than Gloucester’s to Edmund” (pages 140-141). This book was published in 2013.

Related Programs:

Shakespeare Uncovered: King Lear  (2015) -  Actor Christopher Plummer talks about the role of King Lear and about the play. He says, “When Lear and Gloucester meet on the heath, you see two old friends who have changed utterly.” Regarding the Fool, he says: “Once Cordelia is no longer there for Lear, his most significant relationship is with his Fool, and that’s how we get a glimpse of a different side of Lear.” He mentions how in his production of King Lear (directed by Jonathan Miller), the Fool was the same age as Lear. Jonathan Miller is interviewed in this program. There are also interviews with other actors who have played Lear, including Ian McKellen and Simon Russell Beale, plus with Olivia Vinall, who played Cordelia in 2014, and with Stephen Greenblatt. There is also footage from several film versions of the play. Plummer does talk with theatre historian Tanya Pollard about the version with the happy ending. This was directed by Nicola Stockley, and aired on PBS on January 30, 2015.