Shakespeare Parodies Part 3

Hamlet (and yes, I have stressed this before) is the most oft-parodied play that I have found among others on television, movies, comics, etc. Here is more Hamlet hilarity with these videos.

This video, "Hamlet: Prince of YouTube," features a guy using the "To be or not to be" speech as a base to make fun of the woes of YouTube.




This video below is taken from the animated series Animaniacs. This cartoon parodies the scene where the skull of Yorick is dug up, with Dot translating what is being said into sarcastic, modern English.



- Kristopher

Hamlet - An Intriguing and Troubled Protagonist

Hamlet is considered to be one of Shakespeare's most memorable and iconic plays. It is also the play that the title character is as strong as the story itself, for the audience watches his many layers displayed when he puts on his "madness" front and the tortured soul when everyone's attention is not focused on him.

Hamlet's appeal over the centuries is clear. We can all relate to Hamlet in his angst and unaccepting nature that his mother had been married to his uncle in such a short time. His thirst for vengeance throughout the play is also intriguing, in both character analysis and the story itself. Hamlet serves as a tragic example of how a young and brilliant man can destroy himself in the quest for revenge, as he pulls down many people along the way.

The most notable individual is Ophelia, who loved Hamlet from the very start. But Polonius and Laertes opposed this kind of relationship, which serves to drive Ophelia over the edge. Hamlet denies his love for her, driving Ophelia closer to the brink, especially how she should "be sent to a nunnery." It is the death of Polonius by Hamlet's hand that does her in. She drowns herself in a brook, a testament to how high the cost of revenge is.

Even to those who do not know Shakespeare, the image of Hamlet holding up a human skull is a popular image with the Bard. The skull that Hamlet holds belonged to Yorick, a jester from Hamlet's childhood. Some people think Shakespeare wanted Elizabethan audiences to connect Yorick with Richard Tarlton, who was famous prior to Shakespeare and was dead by the time Yorick was mentioned.

The Prince of Denmark has been portrayed by many people. Laurence Olivier is one famous example in the British 1948 production of Hamlet. In most recent years, Mel Gibson and Kenneth Branagh have also played their hand as the title character.

Franco Zefirelli's 1990 Hamlet with Gibson is pretty much an action flick with most of the dialogue left out. I saw this version quite a while ago with "Lethal Hamlet" intense and brawny. Branagh's 1996 version, which I have not seen, is four hours long with all dialogue included. A 2000 version featuring Ethan Hawke as the brooding Hamlet was released in the style of Romeo + Juliet, in that it takes place in a modern setting.

Also famous is Hamlet's "To be, or not to be" speech. Those who have read into the play understand it is the Prince of Denmark's contemplation of suicide. This speech has been used many times and it also has been spoofed several times.

This video below comes from 1996's Hamlet, with Branagh as Hamlet uttering the famous soliloquy.

- Kristopher

Shakespeare - A Hidden Catholic?

During the reign of Elizabeth I, Catholics were not given an easy rest. During the Elizabethan period, it was easy to be prosecuted for the religion being practiced other than the main Protestant faith that Elizabeth decreed.

So how can we tell if Shakespeare was a Catholic or not? The play Hamlet depicts the slain king suffering in purgatory, who tells Hamlet to avenge his death. Purgatory was a Catholic concept, with a soul being trapped in the region between heaven and hell, unable to go to heaven especially for "venial faults." Another example would be in Richard II, where on the stage the king confesses to use prayer with beads, another form of worship that met with hostility in England. Both forms of evidence were the basis of a retired Lawrence high school teacher turned KU graduate who looked into Shakespeare's faith.

Although there is a great possibility and speculation that Shakespeare was Catholic, the idea is not concrete. Not much is known about his life, for few records exist that depict how he lived. Shakespeare regardless wrote plays that are quite ambigous in nature so it would not have mattered to a Protestant, Catholic or a person of any other faith if they enjoyed the play. Shakespeare has not preached strong values in his time, he was only interested in creating entertaining dramas which persist to this day.

- Kristopher

Trickery, Again!

After reading the beginning few pages of King Henry the Fourth, Part 1 several times to get a good idea of who was who, I was happy to find in the following pages of the play a little humor. I have to admit, this Shakespeare play frightened me a little. I was expecting complete boredom, as I read it, and I had a hard time understanding who all of the characters were, at first. As I read on, King Henry's son, Harry, proved to be my link to "appreciation." Although Falstaff seemed to me to be a cumbersome clown at times, it was Harry who instigated and carried out numerous tricks on the poor fellow, which I enjoyed, immensely. Harry's and his sidekicks' stealing money from Falstaff as Falstaff himself had just stolen it was fun reading. My first impression of Harry was a little "off" as well, thinking him somewhat a cruel young man, but realizing later he was a kid at heart and had quite a fondness, in fact, for Falstaff. And, Shakespeare tricked me on this one, which was perhaps his intention for all of his readers. His combination of many human elements-love, hate, betrayal, trickery, and especially humor-in most of his plays make his genius exude and his humanity evident. .....Linda

Shakespeare Fan Fiction

William Shakespeare is not even safe from the fan fiction craze. I'm guilty of having written this type of fiction a long time ago as a teenager, scribing mostly parodies of existing series of various media.

I cannot say fanfiction should be abhored, but sometimes it can get horrid to the point that it makes for a good laugh.

This site includes a large list Shakespeare fan fiction.

- Kristopher

Much Ado about Nothing - Kristopher's Reaction

In all honesty, I did not suspect that Much Ado About Nothing would become one of my favorite Shakespearian plays. I'd like to thank my partner Linda who did a small analysis of some of the play's themes earlier, in the post "Nothing Like a Friend..."

I have been meaning to post my feelings about the play itself, with all the character explanations I have been throwing onto the blog. At first, I was cynical about enjoying the play. I have read Shakespeare's tragedies Macbeth and Hamlet, which gave me the impression that a comedy about two pairs of lovers dealing with court issues would seem meager in comparison to Macbeth's pressure into power and Hamlet's struggle with revenge. Between a serious piece and a funny one, I would usually opt for the more serious piece with death, despair and an ending where love does not conquer all.

In the area of real life romance, I could not stand a chance. The big question was of how I was going to relate to a bunch of people in court struggling with their feelings without the fantasy setting of A Midsummer Night's Dream.

But with Much Ado About Nothing, that cynicism melted away. There is very funny wordplay involved, and I know I offered a few snippets of dialogue throughout the blog. From Benedick and Beatrice's fencing with words to Dogberry's malapropisms, Much Ado About Nothing hardly gets dull. Even for other people who have had little or no experience with relationships will still enjoy this Shakespearian classic.

I got into the tepid arguements between Benedick and Beatrice. Those two were made for one another in that they can lash out with whatever sharp comments they can come up with and rebound. All right, so Beatrice usually wins the fights but the point is, the romantic tension between ladies' man Benedick and witty, strong willed Beatrice was captivating and kept the play moving forward.

I imagine all guys would want to be Benedick; confident, swaggering and able to duel with words. This does not make Claudio and Hero shadows of Benedick and Beatrice. They are the couple who are not gifted with any "special" abilities to set things straight. They are the couple we can relate to in that there are people and things that control them. The overall point is that we can all relate to and pity Claudio and Hero in one way or another.

Claudio is the very opposite of Benedick, for he is no Casanova. He is a fairly gullible character, being fooled by Don John's "claim" that Hero was permiscous. Combined with his insecurities, the forces of love's difficulty make Claudio frustrated, assuming that Hero is unchaste. Hero herself matches well with Claudio because there are strong forces of love outside of her hands as well. She is forced to stay strong, not usually boisterous as Beatrice, and is "resurrected" as a stronger person after Don John and company get their vicious due.

Still, between the "Favorite Couples" area, Benedick and Beatrice still win for me for the sake of their entertainment value. Okay, so they can be a fun couple to watch, but I imagine both of them in real life would be a bother to deal with. There are many real life equivalents of Benedick who are obnoxious. Obnoxiousness is funny in the play but would be a chore in real life to deal with. And I really like Beatrice but she would be a difficult person for me to get to know in real life, even on a friendly basis. She aims her vicious words at almost everybody involved.

The sad thing about Much Ado About Nothing is that it is possibly underrated. I can find plenty of critical essays and articles, but many people do not go out of their way to express their love for the play. I have looked all around to find only a few good parody clips, some footage from the film adaptation and stage performance footage.

So maybe I am exaggerating, as there are some solid clips, just not enough good "tributes." Plays like Hamlet get their justice with Star Wars themed spoofs, and even King Lear was parodied using themes from The Office. But Much Ado About Nothing almost gets zilched.

Overall, this is a play to enjoy its characters struggling with romance, as all of us can relate to folks who just cannot grasp love so easily.

- Kristopher

Shakespeare Parodies Part 2

Last time I made this type of post, most of the parodies involved the play Hamlet. This will probably prove true to this post, since Hamlet is highly spoofed.

I have said before that looking for decent parodies of Much Ado About Nothing was as hard as finding a contact lense in an ocean. Click this link to not only find an example of "bad" Shakespeare, but an example of "minimalist" Shakespeare.

A more promising spoof took place alongside the Star Wars universe. Will Shakespeare with lightsabers get boring? Probably not. Are they usually funny together? Most likely. Below is a cartoon made by 11th grade English students. The lack of animation makes this cleverly written video funnier.



The other video belows is an example of "convoluted" Shakespeare. You have the plot and dialogue of Much Ado About Nothing coupled with Monty Python and the Holy Grail.



I have looked at the results for "Favorite Shakespearian Character Part 2." I'm quite disappointed to see the lack of results. To confess, I was the one who put a vote in for Hamlet.

With the new poll however, it appears that Beatrice is in the lead! I am guilty as charged in the fact that I help her rise in the poll. However, I noticed a surge of blog activity so the pace should go up fairly soon.

- Kristopher

Much Ado About Falstaff

Sir John Falstaff is everyone's favorite slacker, glutton, sleaze, big mouth, pervert, do-nothing, idiot, coward and Shakespearian character. He would be the equivalent of the "dumb best buddy," the bloke convincing you to do just about anything stupid such as flinging toilet paper on the neighbor's house.

Despite being a knight, Falstaff displays the chivalry of a drunken tavern patron. Rather than indulging in good deeds, the fat knight "lives" to his fullest. He drinks, he lechers, he overeats and manipulates Hal into performing asinine activities. Falstaff appears to bring out Hal's worse side, the childish side that King Henry IV despises. This could be Shakespeare's way of showing Hal's irresponsible, reluctant side through Falstaff himself.

Hotspur, Hal's polar opposite, would be raging with a blade about Falstaff's statement of honor. According to Falstaff, honor is valuable as plain dirt:

“Can honour set to a leg? No. Or an arm? No. Or take away the grief of a wound? No. . . . What is honour?”

If Falstaff is such a loser, why does he endure throughout the years as one of the most memorable Shakespeare characters of all time?

Sure, being with the obese knight may not be fun. But watching Falstaff hearing his outrageous speeches is a treat to behold. Like Shylock, Falstaff escape's Shakespeare's pen, almost taking reign of King Henry IV and the attention of the struggling protagonist, Prince Hal.

Interestingly enough, Falstaff was inspired by an English soldier named John Fastolf, who is described of bragging and being a coward. It was enough to inspire Falstaff as a rotund loudmouth.

If Falstaff had a large appetite of being on stage, he would practically be a large bowling ball with the attention fed to him. Several actors have claimed to have fun portraying the fat knight.

One prime example would be Orson Welles, whose immortality was acquired through the classic movie Citizen Kane. Welles has worked with Shakespeare's other plays such as Macbeth and Twelth Night.

Falstaff is memorable in that his type of persona would exist today. He would represent all the vices we all get into. In a way, as we laugh at Falstaff, we laugh at ourselves.

- Kristopher

Much Ado About...Ghetto?

Once again, Shakespeare is a fun source for parody. Looking for a spoof of Much Ado About Nothing was difficult, especially for one to do justice poking fun at the play.

This was filmed by a group of students who decided to set it in "da hood." It's zanier than it sounds!

I like the beginning where the host, "Dr. Robert Sweeney," is pouring himself some vintage Diet Coke.

- Kristopher

Much Ado About Nothing (1993) - A Film Review

Shakespeare and Hollywood have had a strange career together. Usually when Tinseltown puts a spin on the Bard's works, the results are mixed. You would have shoddy interpretations that are overblown and overdone with historial props, leaving little to the original dialogue and let alone the story.

On the other hand, there have been decent Shakespeare pickings. You would have 1968's Romeo and Juliet (and even 1996's Romeo + Juliet is good in my opinion, though some cry afoul of it) among other films that are faithful and at the same time decent cinema.

Kenneth Branagh's 1993 adaptation of Much Ado About Nothing fits the bill of the "A+ Shakespeare List" despite its few quibbles.

The movie opens up with the ladies hanging around the Italian countryside. Beatrice catches sight of the seven male characters of the play on horseback. Michael Flachman of Shakespeare: From Page to Stage commented that this scene was too similiar to a cinematic reference of The Magnificent Seven. I would have to agree, but then again, even Shakespeare has to play by some rules in celluoid. This is Branagh's big reminder of that.

Thankfully we have some faithful dialogue coupled with excellent acting to complement the tale of love and romantic tomfoolery. Branagh is charming and hilarious as the overconfident Benedick, with the garden scene of "romantic revelation" being one of his high points. Emma Thompson plays a ferocious Beatrice that would be close to how Shakespeare's Beatrice would be portrayed. Like Branagh, not one moment is dull with her as she has her funny moments with vicious wordplay and cinematic believability.

Robert Sean Leonard and a pre-Underworld Kate Beckinsale do their roles well as the lovers Claudio and Hero. Like the play, they are the "low key" characters who do not have Benedick's or Beatrice's confidence, often letting outside forces (and other characters) run their lives. Leonard and Beckensdale are an attractive pair together, fitting into the story and the cast.
Michael Keaton as Dogberry can either grow on you or just repel. To me, he was hilarious using his Beatlejuice shtick to portray the bumbling watchman, even borrowing from Monty Python for his slick "steed!" Compared to Dogberry in the play, Keaton's interpretation was comically sadistic and over the top. He abuses his fellow watchmen with glee, providing great comic relief for the film.

Denzel Washington as Don Pedro is faithful to the Shakespearian character. Pedro has always been an "observer," and Washington does well in the role to that respect. The delivery of his lines were impressive and we seem to be watching with him on the events happening within the movie.

The only character who might have needed to be torn from the ink parchment would be Keanu Reeves as the villainous Don John. In earlier posts, Linda and I have "dogberried" him for being "platidudinous." He always keeps the same grim, evil face throughout his entire performance. Did Reeves expect to travel through a phone booth? Or ride a high speeding bus? How about investigating bank robbers who are also surfers? Reeves is more suited to these roles than a bitter "bastard" of a character. Even when not speaking, he is unintentionally hilarious of both the preconceptions of his performances and his handling of Don John. Flachman can complain all he wants about Keaton's performance, but Reeves really dropped the Shakespearian ball.

Branagh's direction goes well exploring the characters and being faithful to Shakespeare's original work, so not a dull moment is to be seen in his version. He nailed the effects and visuals that cannot be matched with a stage play. On the other hand, Shakespeare fans will notice a loss of "juice" in certain scenes, for everything could not be translated smoothly. Stage-to-movie issues exist but Branagh has done the job in not trying too hard to make a faithful adaptation.

Overall, Branagh's Much Ado About Nothing earns an eight out of ten for a jolly good effort. If you are one of the purists who hate Leonardo diCaprio and Claire Danes in a "modern" adapation of Romeo + Juliet or simply cannot stand Mel Gibson playing as the skull holding Hamlet, there will be little disappointment provided with this offering from Hollywood.

Extra Note: For the poll, it appears that opinions were mixed on Mr. Reeves' performance in Shakespeare. There was a vote concerning he was better off "following the white rabbit," while the other ponders the question: "Why is he famous overall?" Thanks for participating!

- Kristopher

The Tool that Shakespeare Used

With all of Shakespeare's plays that have created a legacy in English and in popular culture as a whole, it is easy to overlook the tool used to write the plays. This small post is dedicated to the quill pen! I was showing Linda how to insert images on a post and the idea of this instrument came to mind.

In the Renaissance era, it would be impossible that to get anything written, without the aid of ink and this type of pen to get any progress made. From about 600 to 1800, this pen derived from bird feathers saw heavy use.

Nowadays, this tool is still used but usually for creative purposes in the field of calligraphy. A few Shakespeare images feature the bard himself holding a pen, a literary knight holding up his ink drenched sword.

This image and pen came from Conway Stewart, in which the site also has a healthy chunk of information about Shakespeare.

- Kristopher

Theatre Footage of "Much Ado About Nothing"

I've been looking for an excuse to announce the poll results for "Favorite Couple." For the last one, I decided to play with the Weird Sisters. Now I have found an opportunity to post up a video on how Benedick is in love with Beatrice. Poor Benedick...



Both these clips are from the Warren Wilson Theatre's production of Much Ado About Nothing, in Warren Wilson College in Asheville, North Carolina. Linda and I were looking for pictures and videos, as I was showing her how to post up videos and images on the blog.



- Kristopher

Don John - "A playing, dealing villain" indeed

Don John, the bastard brother of Don Pedro, is the antagonist of Much Ado About Nothing. You can easily tell this for the fact this man is one of "few words." And of course, his title of "Bastard" does more than state that he is an illigitimate son.

John is very aware of his villanous state, and is extremely unapologetic about it. He talks to Conrad about his status in Act I, Scene 3, that he rather be a "...canker in a hedge than a rose..." and that there is nothing to alter him into a model citizen.

It sounds like he is a miserable, with a love to throw other people's lives into chaos. Mainly, he frames Hero for being unchaste and convinces the gullible Claudio of this. He even manages to fool everyone else of Hero's supposed promiscuity, causing great despair to Hero herself. But why does John do this? Is it simply because he is the "bastard" in the play? Shakespeare, the clever wordsmith, seems to imply his title alone motivates John to be nothing but a vicious, deceitful bad guy.

Or maybe John is just a lonely, vicious deceitful bad guy. How would one feel to have some drunk fellow named "Barrachio" as a minion, with a sniveling conspirator named "Conrad?" John despises his brother for the attention he gets as well as being good friends with likeable Benedick and Claudio. Does John spend any quality time with the boys in a meaningful way? Not really on any level. And that would lead him to spoil everyone's fun time.

On a historical level, being a "bastard" was not a completely bad thing, as even bastard children were usually accepted into the family. Back in the middle ages, William the Conqueror was a well known bastard. That did not stop him from storming England despite crude remarks that he smelled of the tannery, for his mother was a tanner's daughter.

Back to Much Ado About Nothing, John gets his due by having his minions, Conrad and Baracchio, apprehended by Dogberry and company. John gets apprehended at the very end of the play, with Benedick planning to punish him somehow. However, his capture is only mentioned and we are not rewarded with John ranting and raving of his plan being foiled. Guess he still gets the last laugh!

John is played by Keanu Reeves in Kenneth Branagh's Much Ado About Nothing, and I have to agree with Linda that his performance was simply a "stone faced" one. From the moment I saw him on the screen, I had to conceal a chuckle. Can you imagine John saying "Whoa, I shall go on an excellent adventure to create a horrid point break in romance just because I'm the one with the title of 'bastard?'" Reeves looked bored out of his mind and even hearing him uttering the "I am a man of few words" line was almost an unintentionally comic moment in the adaptation. Throughout the movie, Reeves acted like some angry, manipulative teenager as opposed to a sinister wedding crasher.

This is not to say that Reeves is a terrible actor, as he had appeared in a production of Hamlet in Winnipeg as the lead role, garnering positive criticism. Perhaps Reeves was simply miscast, as he had better roles in The Matrix movies, The Devil's Advocate and Point Break.

Below is a music video homage to Reeves' interpretation of Don John from 1993's Much Ado About Nothing. The video still does not help Reeves' "villanous Don John image," but particular fans will still get a kick out of it. - Kristopher

Keanu Reeves is a Platypus?

The version of Shakespeare's play we are watching in Dr. Clemente's class, Much Ado About Nothing, is realistic and has believable character portrayals by nearly all of its actors. But I said, "nearly all."

Emma Thompson's reenactment of Leonato's boisterous niece is excellent. Denzel Washington does a tremendous job portraying his character, Don Perdo, Prince of Aragon.

Keanu Reeves plays Don John, the cold and calculating bastard brother of Don Pedro. Reeves presents his character in a manner that, to me, is too much ado! A word that came into my vocabulary recently, platitudinous, an adjective meaning flat, describes Reeves' performance in this movie. Reeves is "stone faced" and overplays his anger. In my opinion, Reeves picked the wrong part to play.

The director of this movie did a great job directing the other characters, but must have turned a blind eye and deaf ear to Reeves. He is considered to be a movie star of The Matrix, I know, but he missed his mark in Much Ado About Nothing ....Linda

Dogberry and his Malapropisms

Usually in a Shakespeare comedy, you would have a cast of characters who may not be comedic by nature but are usually thrust in comedic situations. You have Benedick and Beatrice, who constantly bicker at each other with creative use of language. You have Claudio and Hero, whose relationship is troubled by the manipulations of Don John and his cohorts. All the characters are people whom you could relate to in real life who have situations thrust at them.

Of course, Shakespeare has characters highly comedic by nature. Dogberry, a watchman in Much Ado About Nothing, is comical relief for the comedy itself. He is memorable in that he constantly uses malapropisms, or incorrect uses of words, in his dialogue.

Dogberry has a few examples up his unknowing sleeve, with the incorrect words italicized and the correct words in parenthesis:

"We will spare for no wit, I warrant you. Here's that shall drive some of them to a nonecome. Only get the learned writer to set down our excommunication, and meet me at the jail. (Examination)

"Goodman Verges, sir, speaks a little off the matter-an old man, sir, and his wits are not so blunt." (Sharp)

"One word, sir. Our watch, sir, have indeed comprehended two aspicious persons, and we would have them this morning examined before your worship." (Apprehended and suspicious)

"Is our whole dissembly appeared?" (Assembly)

"O villain! Thou wilt be condemned into everlasting redemption for this." (Damnation)

Where did the malapropism come from? It is derived from the character Mrs. Malaprop, coming from the 1775 comedy The Rivals written by Richard Sheridan. Malaprop itself is derived from mal a propos, meaning "inappropriate" in French. Mrs. Malaprop, like Dogberry, was a character who always used words in the most "inappropriate" manner imaginable!

Here are a few examples, with incorrect words italicized and the correct words in parenthesis:

"Oh, he will dissolve my mystery!" (Resolve)

"Oh! It gives me such hydrostatics to such a degree!" (Hysterics)

"...she might reprehend the true meaning of what she is saying." (Comprehend)

As you can see, the misuse of words will lead to confusion and importantly, humor!

Even though Dogberry's incorrect use of certain words might seem to backfire on him, they actually do the opposite. It helps Dogberry and his men help foil Don John's nefarious plot as well as to capture two of his minions!

Has Dogberry made any further contributions other than accidently "outsmarting" Don John and his malicious company? In a way, for referring to a "dogberry" would be referring to an inept or a really dumb official. He is not to be confused with the dogberry fruit which grows on certain plants, particuarily the European dogwood. We can assume Shakespeare dubbed Dogberry as a fruit, or a truly inept Renaissance version of a "fruitcake!"

For more Dogberry escapades, here is a scene from the Hinds Community College Raymond Campus production of Much Ado About Nothing, with Dogberry and company "respecting," or suspecting, the culprits!

- Kristopher

Nothing Like a Friend...

A common theme in Shakespeare's comedies is "Friendship." Whether it be the characters in A Midsummer's Night's Dream, with Lysander and Demetreus and Hermia and Helena, or Claudio and Don Pedro, with cousins Beatrice and Hero in Much Ado About Nothing, it seems that "friendship" gets amusingly side-tracked in the scheme of things.

I especially enjoyed the true to life situations in Much Ado About Nothing leading to Beatrice's and Benedick's union, where their dear friends stepped in to make them realize their love for each other. Without the help of their fellow schemers, excuse me, friends, love would have been lost for 'Bea' and 'Ben.'

Which brings me to another thought. I like how Shakespeare uses simple ideas for the action, for his characters, that have been present in people throughout history. Childish play and ridiculous skirmishes between friends have been happening, forever. To see these characteristics in the adults in many of Shakespeare's comedies brings truth, as well as enjoyment, to the reading of his plays. Beatrice's and Benedick's name calling and exagerated hate for each other reminded me of two school kids fighting. I recognized the "lingo" and knew right away that they were in love! ...Linda

Poll Results - Weird Sister Folklore

Well, it seemed that most of you picked the three Weird Sisters as your favorite set of characters among other iconic Shakesperian creations. Even Puck with his trickery, Caliban with his feral nature and Shylock with his miserly stature could not stand up to the power of the three. I know I could have added more characters to the poll, with several other memorable Shakespeare personas, but I was merely testing the feature itself.

The witches are probably the most memorable icons in Shakespeare lore, with "Bubble, bubble, toil and trouble!" popping in most people's minds.

The word "weird" was derived from "wyrd," which meant "fate" or "future." "Weird" has been commonly used ever since the performance of Macbeth to describe something out of place or simply uncanny. The presence of the Weird Sisters was not a new concept during Shakespeare's time, as they have thrived through the world of Old Norse mythology.

These three sisters have left their mark (and magic) on popular culture. There is a folk group known as Three Weird Sisters. They work in the filk genre, which deals primarily with themes of science fiction and fantasy. In the novel Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, there is an all male rock group known as the "Weird Sisters" who perform during the Yule Ball.

It seems that the witches will not stop casting their spells to facinate fans of Shakespeare and folklore for quite some time. Till then, I posted a new poll of which couple is the best in Much Ado About Nothing. Who will prevail? Is it Benedick and Beatrice, with their vicious quips to one another? Or is it Claudio and Hero, in which the tragedy and comedy of the play alter their character development?

- Kristopher

Shylock and Anti-semitism

Shylock was initially written in as a stereotypical character, close to a state of villainy. But as the play progresses, he becomes more of a tragic figure, being cornered like an animal. Shylock is simply dubbed "the Jew," especially by everyone's favorite extrovert, Gratiano. Jessica runs off with her Christian lover, Lorenzo, deepening his wounds further.

This can attribute to the harsh treatment the Jews received during the Renaissance. At the time, lending money was the only career that Jews could attain. From the dominant Christian standpoint, money lending was considered a "sin," and this lowered the status of Jewish people even further. Even though anti-semitism has decreased in Europe, it still runs rampant and elsewhere in the world.

The influence of Shylock and Shakespearian themes have introduced the new term known as "shylocking." To label someone as a "shylock" is to call him or her a "loan shark." A "shylock", simply put, is a person who lends money at a rate that would make the patron throw the hat down and yell a series of curse words. "Shylock" has popped up in the movie Get Shorty and even "a pound of flesh" has shown up on tongues as a way of getting revenge.

In irony, though Shylock has been portrayed as the stereotype on how people viewed Jews in the day, he is a character that for a while controlled Shakespeare's pen. Whether Shakespeare was or was not anti-semitic, he could not directly portray actual injustice done on Jews because of the intense hatred that flooded through his period, save for Shylock's speech about prejudice aimed at him.

Below is a scene from a clip of 2004's The Merchant of Venice, with Al Pacino presenting Shylock's most famous speech, and possibly the most famous speech from Shakespeare's writings. Bringing the video onto this post was not as difficult as I made it out to be, as I just went to "Edit Html" which allowed the video to be set.

- Kristopher

"Puck"-Sinister or Silly?

Shakespeare's 'Puck' in "A Midsummer's Night's Dream" is certainly a character I misunderstood when I read the story. I envisioned 'Puck' to be a really sinister character, plotting with Oberon more than once, causing havoc for the story's characters. I should have taken the hints the story offered me, such as the descriptive word "Sprite" and Puck's other name, "Robin Goodfellow." "Sprite" suggests a quick and bubbly temperament. A robin is a small little bird, liked by all. What else but goodness should I think Goodfellow to mean.

However, not until I viewed the early movie version of "A Midsummer's Night Dream" in Dr. Clemente's Shakespeare class did I get a true appreciation for the character, "Puck." Now, I confess that Puck is my favorite character in the play. I realize that watching Mickey Rooney perform Puck's character helped me change my view of the character as a whole. The movie version of the play added the 'sound' to Puck's voice that I did not hear when I read the play. His screeches were wonderfully done. And in true character of a little "sprite." I found Puck's laughter to be exciting and silly (in a funny way), and absolutely memorable.

Mickey Rooney deserved an Oscar for his role in this adaption of the play. ...Linda

Four Scenarios in "A Midsummer's Night Dream"

"A Midsummer's Night Dream" has four different character situations that make this Shakespearean play greatly funny and enjoyable.



First, there are the lovers, Lysander, Demetrius, Hermia, and Helena, who go against parental authority (Thesues, Hippolyta, and Egues) and are involved in 'trickery,' trying to connect to their perfect mate, giving us one scenario.



Second, Peter Quince, Nick Bottom, Francis Flute, Tom Snout, Snug, and Robin Starveling ( I call them the Court Jesters) keep the laughs coming in their situation.






I divide the Third and Forth scenarios between Oberon, King of the (Dark) Fairies and Titania, Queen of the (Bright and Light) Fairies who both want possession of the beautiful young boy, causing Oberon to go to 'devilish' means to capture him.



In my opinion, each scenario could stand on its own to create a story, or play. By twisting, turning, and intertwining the excitement of each situation with the other, Shakespeare shows his genius once again to captivate and control our extreme emotions (Love, Hate, Surprise, Excitement, Wonder, etc.).

...Linda