http://clevermsbennet.livejournal.com/ (![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png)
clevermsbennet.livejournal.com) wrote in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png)
fandomhigh2009-01-15 11:47 am
clevermsbennet.livejournal.com) wrote in fandomhigh2009-01-15 11:47 am
Entry tags:
Literature, Class 2: Period 3, Thursday, January 15
"Welcome back," Miss Bennet said, smiling at her students. She was properly attired, as she had not yet suffered too greatly from the loss of the laundry machines. (Ah, the comforts of being from the past.) "Last semester, I began class by covering an author with whom I was particularly familiar, as I was not expecting to be a literature teacher, and hoped to gain more time for research by spending a week with one whose work needed little introduction to myself, and possibly just as little to many of you. This term, I have a much more thorough knowledge of the many years of literature that I have missed. However, I have decided we should start there, once more. This particular individual's works are highly regarded as classics, through many cultures, and those works open some interesting avenues for discussion. Therefore, we will begin with an 'author' who was not, in fact, an author at all."
"William Shakespeare," she began, sitting on the edge of her desk, "Was born April 26th, 1564, in Stratford-upon-Avon, England. He was a skilled wordsmith, and throughout his lifetime, he wrote a few epic poems, as well as numerous shorter works known as sonnets. However, Shakespeare's true masterpieces are said to be the countless plays he wrote and directed for the London stage. At the time, the plays were written for many different tastes: a great deal of ribald word-play, for those who enjoyed low humour; fight scenes for the violently inclined; moving, dramatic soliloquoys for the intellectuals; proper deference shown at all times to Her Majesty the Queen. Those plays are now considered classics, but I can assure you, Shakespeare would be very surprised indeed to know that his scripts were being read as part of a literature class.
"Perhaps we should start there. Is there not an essential disconnect required in reading a script? Novels provide the scenery and setting; they, further, allow you to view the inner thoughts and desires of the characters. Most plays, by contrast, give only the necessary stage directions -- though I might imagine some playwrights to be more meticulous, and others less so. Introspection is only possible through soliloquy. Watching a play allows all of these elements to come together, but is there not some degree to which reading a play is not unlike reading a recipe? A script is a blueprint, a set of instructions on how to achieve a desired result. One might read a recipe and imagine that the scones might taste wonderful, but there is no way to say so, positively, from the recipe alone. Is there a way to overcome this, in a classroom environment?
"Shakespeare directed his own plays; one may well imagine that he failed to include detailed notes on character motivations and other particulars as he fully intended to deliver those instructions, in person, to his actors. Take, for an example, the work entitled That Scottish Play. Near the end of Act I, Lady MacFinley is urging Lord MacFinley to murder the king and take his throne for himself, as he has promised to do, but his courage is failing him. Lord MacFinley asks her, 'If we should fail?' To which she replies, two simple words: 'We fail.'
Eliza glanced around the class again. "There have been untold debates on how it is that she should speak that line. Is she philosophical? Has she decided nothing else matters but achieving this end? Has she resigned herself to the possibility of discovery and execution? Is she mocking her husband? Is she ruthless? Remember that not all of these are mutually exclusive. Each production of this play must decide how to approach this line. For that matter, each production of this play must decide one hundred other similar details; the motivations of minor characters, the exact specifications of the stage, the manner of dress, the lighting, how to best achieve any effects. This is to say nothing of renditions which deliberately change the original for some decided end, such as moving the work to a different location or timeframe.
"Is that perhaps why Shakespeare remains so very popular? Is there a degree to which the flexibility of his work allows them to breathe and change and adapt along with us? Many of his ideas were taken from earlier plays, and other works. No plot is truly original, not when distilled down to its essence. Did he perhaps tell these classic stories in a way that reached the audience more poignantly than other works? Is there something universal about these tales? None of us have, perhaps, urged our husbands towards regicide, but watching Lady MacFinley grasp for power, then spiral into madness and despair from her own crippling guilt is recognizable, nonetheless."
"However," she smiled. "Those are only my thoughts. I should like very much to hear what all of you think."
"William Shakespeare," she began, sitting on the edge of her desk, "Was born April 26th, 1564, in Stratford-upon-Avon, England. He was a skilled wordsmith, and throughout his lifetime, he wrote a few epic poems, as well as numerous shorter works known as sonnets. However, Shakespeare's true masterpieces are said to be the countless plays he wrote and directed for the London stage. At the time, the plays were written for many different tastes: a great deal of ribald word-play, for those who enjoyed low humour; fight scenes for the violently inclined; moving, dramatic soliloquoys for the intellectuals; proper deference shown at all times to Her Majesty the Queen. Those plays are now considered classics, but I can assure you, Shakespeare would be very surprised indeed to know that his scripts were being read as part of a literature class.
"Perhaps we should start there. Is there not an essential disconnect required in reading a script? Novels provide the scenery and setting; they, further, allow you to view the inner thoughts and desires of the characters. Most plays, by contrast, give only the necessary stage directions -- though I might imagine some playwrights to be more meticulous, and others less so. Introspection is only possible through soliloquy. Watching a play allows all of these elements to come together, but is there not some degree to which reading a play is not unlike reading a recipe? A script is a blueprint, a set of instructions on how to achieve a desired result. One might read a recipe and imagine that the scones might taste wonderful, but there is no way to say so, positively, from the recipe alone. Is there a way to overcome this, in a classroom environment?
"Shakespeare directed his own plays; one may well imagine that he failed to include detailed notes on character motivations and other particulars as he fully intended to deliver those instructions, in person, to his actors. Take, for an example, the work entitled That Scottish Play. Near the end of Act I, Lady MacFinley is urging Lord MacFinley to murder the king and take his throne for himself, as he has promised to do, but his courage is failing him. Lord MacFinley asks her, 'If we should fail?' To which she replies, two simple words: 'We fail.'
Eliza glanced around the class again. "There have been untold debates on how it is that she should speak that line. Is she philosophical? Has she decided nothing else matters but achieving this end? Has she resigned herself to the possibility of discovery and execution? Is she mocking her husband? Is she ruthless? Remember that not all of these are mutually exclusive. Each production of this play must decide how to approach this line. For that matter, each production of this play must decide one hundred other similar details; the motivations of minor characters, the exact specifications of the stage, the manner of dress, the lighting, how to best achieve any effects. This is to say nothing of renditions which deliberately change the original for some decided end, such as moving the work to a different location or timeframe.
"Is that perhaps why Shakespeare remains so very popular? Is there a degree to which the flexibility of his work allows them to breathe and change and adapt along with us? Many of his ideas were taken from earlier plays, and other works. No plot is truly original, not when distilled down to its essence. Did he perhaps tell these classic stories in a way that reached the audience more poignantly than other works? Is there something universal about these tales? None of us have, perhaps, urged our husbands towards regicide, but watching Lady MacFinley grasp for power, then spiral into madness and despair from her own crippling guilt is recognizable, nonetheless."
"However," she smiled. "Those are only my thoughts. I should like very much to hear what all of you think."