life

Close Reading: Viola’s “I Left No Ring With Her” Soliloquy

| astronut1

For my Shakespeare club, I’m coaching two young actors on Viola’s celebrated soliloquy in Act II, Scene ii.I thought I’d share some of that work with you. In this speech, Viola has an epiphany; the lady she was sent to woo on her master Orsino’s behalf LOVES HER!

The Text

VIOLA

I left no ring with her: what means this lady?
Fortune forbid my outside have not charm’d her!
She made good view of me; indeed, so much,
That sure methought her eyes had lost her tongue,
For she did speak in starts distractedly.
She loves me, sure; the cunning of her passion
Invites me in this churlish messenger.
None of my lord’s ring! why, he sent her none.
I am the man: if it be so, as ’tis,
Poor lady, she were better love a dream.
Disguise, I see, thou art a wickedness,
Wherein the pregnant enemy does much.
How easy is it for the proper-false
In women’s waxen hearts to set their forms!
Alas, our frailty is the cause, not we!
For such as we are made of, such we be.
How will this fadge? my master loves her dearly;
And I, poor monster, fond as much on him;
And she, mistaken, seems to dote on me.
What will become of this? As I am man,
My state is desperate for my master’s love;
As I am woman,–now alas the day!–
What thriftless sighs shall poor Olivia breathe!
O time! thou must untangle this, not I;
It is too hard a knot for me to untie!

Exit

Twelfth Night, Act II, Scene ii, lines 648-672.

The Given Circumstances

Viola has spent an unspecified amount of time disguised as a man. She has just tried (unsuccessfully) to woo Countess Olivia on behalf of her employer, Duke Orsino. Olivia seemed intrigued by her in her disguise as “Cesario,” and refused to hear any more words about Orsino, but asked Viola to come see her again. The Countess then sent her messenger Malvolio to give Viola a ring, which he claims she tried to give to Olivia as a gift. At first, Viola is confused and upset by the accusation, but slowly realizes that the ring is actually a gift for her; in fact, it’s a love token.

Traditional Interpretations

I think the comedy depends on how Viola reacts to the realization that Olivia loves her. I’ve seen some Violas that are embarrassed, some that are a little frightened (after all, hell hath no fury like a woman scorned), and others with sad sympathy. Viola is a good person, so she can’t laugh at the lovesick countess, but she can have a wry laugh at herself and how her disguise has caused all this trouble; making her unable to confess her love to him, while at the same time making Olivia think she is a handsome young man.

Michelle Terry In the Globe Theater (2021)

Michelle Terry as Viola in the 2021 production of “Twelfth Night”

Michelle Terry is very matter-of-fact in her portrayal. She doesn’t pause, she doesn’t drag out the lines. In fact, she seems more annoyed and scandalized than anything else. The comedy comes mainly from her gestures and movements as she talks to the audience as if they were one of her gal-pals- venting her frustration with this ridiculous situation.

 Michelle Terry excels as Viola, straight-faced, tormented, only occasionally raising a conspiratorial eyebrow at the audience. 

https://www.theguardian.com/stage/2021/aug/08/twelfth-night-review-shakespeares-globe-theatre

Judy Dench in the RSC TV show “Playing Shakespeare” is very sympathetic to “Poor Olivia, ” and plays the speech with a romantic sentimentality. She’s focused on Olivia, and feels awful for the false hope she’s given her.

Both these interpretations are valid, and they’re a good baseline for two sides of Viola’s personality- the sensitive genteel duke’s daughter who is sympathetic to Olivia, and the down-to-earth funny one who is willing to disguise herself as a boy to survive.

Literary Devices

Imagery

The main image here is the image of the knot- a central image of how convoluted this love triangle is.

Verse

First Folio Reprint from The Boldlien Library.
I left no Ring with her: what meanes this Lady?
Fortune forbid my out‑side haue not charm'd her:
[650]
She made good view of me, indeed so much,
That me thought her eyes had lost her tongue,
For she did speake in starts distractedly.
She loues me sure, the cunning of her passion
Inuites me in this churlish messenger:
[655]
None of my Lords Ring? Why he sent her none;
I am the man, if it be so, as tis,
Poore Lady, she were better loue a dreame:
Disguise, I see thou art a wickednesse,
Wherein the pregnant enemie does much.
[660]
How easie is it, for the proper false
In womens waxen hearts to set their formes:
Alas, O frailtie is the cause, not wee,
For such as we are made, if such we bee:
How will this fadge? My master loues her deerely,
[665]
And I (poore monster) fond asmuch on him:
And she (mistaken) seemes to dote on me:
What will become of this? As I am man,
My state is desperate for my maisters loue:
As I am woman (now alas the day)
[670]
What thriftlesse sighes shall poore Oliuia breath?
O time, thou must vntangle this, not I,
It is too hard a knot for me t'vnty.

It’s interesting to note that (in the First Folio text), the verse alternates between being regular, and using a run-on technique called enjabment, where the thoughts continue after the end of the lines, starting with lines three and four. Ironically, when Viola says that Olivia was distracted and confused when she visited her, her own thoughts are disjointed and fragmentary as she reaches the inevitable conclusion that Olivia is infatuated with Viola in her disguise.

Viola’s Emotional Journey

In the book “Shakespeare’s First Texts” by Neil Freeman he describes how the Folio prints the speech in four distinct sections. Freeman hypothesizes that Shakespeare organized this speech into four phrases that chart the stages of emotions Viola goes through:

Each stage has its own easily identifiable quality, reflecting the growing steps of Viola’s journey in what for her is a huge struggle not only to comprehend, but also to deal with the enormous complications of the dreadful love triangle- the potential results of which are now becomming only too clear.

Freeman, 175.

Stage 1: Introduction

In the first three and a half sentences, Viola goes through the facts- she gave no ring to Olivia, Olivia was eying her, and half paying attention to what Viola was saying. The phrase ends with Viola’s conclusion that Olivia must be in love with her.

Stage 2: Complications

The sentences are of very irregular length- sometimes six words per line, sometimes a few as four. According to Freeman, the irregularity of the verse shows how Viola’s emotions are getting the better of her. Viola could be gasping with remorse over the pain she’s caused Olivia, or shocked at how easily she was taken in by Viola’s disguise.

Stage 3: Crisis/ Catharsis

Each line of this section mentions the people in this love triagle: “My master,” “And I,” “And She,” etc. Viola might be thinking about the possible outcomes to this situation- getting fired, getting discovered, getting married, etc.

Stage 4: Summary: “O Time, Thou Must Untangle This, Not I.”

Like Hamlet before her and Macbeth after her, Viola ends her soliloquy by saying she has no conclusion. She has no idea how to solve this problem, but can only hope that Time will provide a solution.

Audience Interaction

As I said, this is a soliloquy, which is to say, a speech where the character is solo or alone onstage. Some people think this means that the characters are talking to themselves, but I firmly disagree with this notion. One reason why Shakespeare writes soliloquies is because they allow a character to share their thoughts and feelings with the audience. They are the ancestors of every aria or solo in opera and musical theater, and every Disney Princess/ Villain song. I’ve even said before that there are some similarities between Viola and a famous Disney Princess:

Resources:

Illustrations

Book Review: William Shakespeare and the Globe

| astronut1

Video Book Review:

Content: 

This is a story of two boys, centuries apart, but united by their love of theater in general, and the Globe Theater in particular. The first is William Shakespeare, whose story Aliki tells from his birth, to his boyhood days, to his rise to prominence in the theater. The second is Sam Wannamaker, the man who spearheaded the project of re-building the Globe Theater from 1949 to the first performance of the Globe in June of 1997. 

Aliki tells this story in the format of an Elizabethan play, dividing it into five acts. Acts I-4 tell the story of Shakespeare’s life while Act V focuses on Sam Wannamaker pursuing his dream. The book concludes with a chronology of Shakespeare’s plays, and a table of his most famous words and expressions, illustrated with adorable characters.

Illustrations: Medium and Style of Illustration

Like many of her books, Aliki’s illustrations are layered and detailed. She uses ink pen outlines to draw her characters, but then fills them in with bright, vibrant colors. She then painstakingly shades them using the crosshatching technique, to create textures that are complex but have a hand-drawn almost impressionistic feel. The characters aren’t ultra-realistic, and the color palette is limited mainly to bright primaries and warm browns, making it look like a child’s box of crayons or colored pencils. This book is designed to appeal to children with its hand-drawn quality. 

Format:

Cover- The cover makes the subject of the book clear to the audience. We see Shakespeare and Globe Theater, but also illustrated moments from his plays. This helps establish that this is not only a biography, it is an introduction to Shakespeare’s plays and poems as well.

Front Matter: The book opens with four pages of quotes from Shakespeare’s plays illustrated with fairies, pipers, and Elizabethan men and women. There is no half-title, no frontispiece and no Half title verso.

Title page verso (copyright page) In the center of the copyright page is an Illustration of Shakespeare standing atop a globe, over the famous lines: “All the world’s a stage, and all the men and women merely players.”  Below the quote in very small letters is the copyright date, a short summary, the ISBN data, card catalog information, and the typography information.

Title Page The title is laid out on a white background with a thin black border. Below the title is an image of a boy (presumably Sam Wanamaker), assembling a paper model of Shakespeare’s globe, with a portrait of Shakespeare in the background. This helps establish that this biography focuses on both Shakespeare and Wanamaker, and makes the reader excited to see the real Globe brought to life in full illustration.

Table of Contents As stated before, the book is organized like an Elizabethan play, so rather than Chapter 1, etc. the book has five Acts with 1-4 scenes in them. Each chapter in the table of contents is labeled with a description that sets the scene; either a location (like London, Stratford, The Globe), or what will happen in the scene (such as “Building” or “Uncovering”). The table then details four appendices that are part of the back matter. 

Preface:  The Preface is referred in the book as an aside, (an Elizabethan theater term meaning something spoken between a character and the audience). This preface acknowledges that, because of the lack of surviving historical information on William Shakespeare, Aliki, like many Shakespearean biographers, has to use some guesswork to fill out the narrative of his life. A second preface (referred to as a Prologue), introduces the story of the book, (namely the lives of Will Shakespeare and Sam Wanamaker). This preface mimics how in Shakespeare’s plays, a prologue would tell the audience what would happen before the narrative started.

Back Matter/ Appendices: There are four appendices in the back matter- A table of Shakespeare’s collected works, a timeline of the book’s events from 1564-1999,  an illustrated list of Shakespearean words and expressions, and finally a list of Shakespearean sites to visit in London and Shakespeare’s home town of Stratford Upon Avon. These appendices show the reader that Shakespeare has an important role in history and in the English language, and encourage the reader to learn more about him. 

Value As an Educational Tool

This story not only tells Shakespeare’s life, it also introduces the reader to his plays and his influence on the English language through the illustrations and frequent Shakespearean quotations. The reader also gains an insight into Elizabethan life and culture by following Will’s journey from Stratford to London. Finally, by juxtaposing Shakespeare’s life with Sam Wannamaker’s, the reader sees Shakespeare through Sam’s eyes as he works his whole life to restore Shakespeare’s Globe to its former glory. The reader develops a love of Shakespeare, (or at least an empathetic respect), and may feel empowered to read more about Shakespeare, see his plays or maybe even become a Shakespearean artist in the future. In short, Aliki’s book brings the world of Shakespeare to young readers in a way that is beautiful to look at, full of insight, and with enough supplemental materials to encourage them to learn more.

Overall Impression:

Like Prospero’s magic in The Tempest, this story is magically told- it is not intended to create a totally realistic representation of Elizabethan life, but to give an exciting, colorful impression of Will’s life and work to the reader. Due to the scant historical details of Will’s life, Aliki chose not to do a standard biography, but, like Shakespeare’s own history plays, to tell a historically authentic story, rooted in truth that brings a time and a place to life, while portraying it an exciting and visually appealing way.

Citation:

Aliki. (2000). William Shakespeare & the Globe. HarperCollins Publishers. 

Spirit Halloween and Shakespeare

| astronut1

I’ve written before that Shakespeare helped influence Halloween as we know it- the images of holding skulls, witches chanting over a cauldron, and even ghosts coming back to plague their murderers all have Shakespearean roots. Exhibit A is how these images and tropes can even be found in beloved Halloween costume stores like Spirit Halloween!

If you like creepy Halloween activities and Shakespeare, please sign up for my fully online, fully asynchronous class: “An Immersive Guide To Shakespeare’s Macbeth!” The class features a digital escape room, an interactive quiz, and a special, undead guest!

Get $10 off my class “An Interactive Guide to Shakespeare’s “Macbeth” ” with coupon code HTHES4NHCN10 until Nov 3, 2023. Get started at https://outschool.com/classes/an-interactive-guide-to-shakespeares-macbeth-jp7TIh9B and enter the coupon code at checkout.

Review: Romeow and Drooliet by Nina Laden

| astronut1
The whole book, read by me!

As you probably know, I love to review children’s adaptations of Shakespeare (whether direct or indirect). “The Lion King,” (Hamlet), “Encanto” (King Lear), and of course, the many adaptations of “Romeo and Juliet,” are mainstays on this website: Gnomio and Juliet, Romeo and Juliet: Sealed With A Kiss, even Disney’s Pocahontas have their basic plot and characters firmly rooted in Verona Italy.

Then one day by chance, I found this book in a local park, and I knew I had to review it!

The Premise

This is a simple re-telling of the story of Shakespeare’s play that focuses on just the young lovers. You feel for these cute little animals and in a way, making them a kitty and a dog smitten with puppy love, makes them more understandable and sympathetic than Shakespeare’s youthful teenagers, who indulge in violent delights without using their human reason.

What It Keeps

The Story

The book keeps the feud between the two families, has the young lovers meet in disguise at a ball, fall in love on a balcony, get married, and amazingly, DIE! Laden still manages to tell the story in a kid-friendly way, though giving it tragic weight.

The Language

The book opens with a rhyming prologue, which, although it isn’t in sonnet form, has the same function as Shakespeare’s prologue- to explain the plot before we see it played out in the book, thus giving the whole story a sense of dramatic irony. Plus, as you can see, Laden also imitates Shakespeare’s love of wordplay with metaphors and puns, (a tale of tails), and alliteration to give the dialogue some wit and effervescence. Reading it gave me giggles like I’d just popped open some champagne.

What it changes: Spoiler alert

All throughout, Laden makes small changes to simplify the plot and remove characters that don’t directly impact the main plot. The characters of Lord/Lady Capulet and Lord/Lady Montegue, The Nurse, Paris, Peter, the servants, and the friars are completely absent, turning an already brief play into an even more compressed story.

Like a lot of animal retellings I’ve seen of this story, the author recasts the human leads as animals that are natural enemies- in this case, cats and dogs. This makes the story easier for kids to understand. As I’ve said before, it’s often difficult to keep track of who belongs to which house in Shakespeare’s version. All you need to know is that Romeo and his brothers are cats and Juliet’s family are dogs.

Funnily enough, my daughter actually complained that the story would’ve been better if Juliet were a cat instead of Romeo, which I agree with for very specific reasons. The character of Tybalt is named after a character from a prose story called “Reynard the Fox,” who had the epithet, Prince of CATS. Mercutio annoys Tybalt by taunting him with this title before challenging him to a duel:

Tybalt: What would you with me?
Mercutio: Good Prince of Cats, nothing but one of your nine lives! Romeo and Juliet, Act III, Scene i.

It would’ve been a funny Shakespeare easter egg to have Juliet and Tybalt be portrayed as cats, but I understand why they went with dogs- Drooliet is a hilarious pun, and having Tybalt be a vicious, rabid dog helps set him up as a fearsome antagonist.

I suppose you’re wondering, how the author keeps Shakespeare’s tragic ending in a children’s book? Well, like Shroedinger’s cat, she manages to make Romeow die and not die at the same time. He gives Drooliet one of his 9 lives, allowing them both to ‘die’ and then come back for a happy ending. It’s a brilliant way to nod at the original, while also keeping the kid-friendly tone.

My Reaction

This book is really fun and very enjoyable for kids, parents, and teachers who want to introduce kids to Shakespeare at an early age!

Free teaching guide from the SAG-Aftra Foundation

romeowanddrooliet_teacheractivityguideDownload

Review: Ye Try Guys Try Romeo and Juliet

| astronut1

I was excited from the beginning to hear that the Try guys were going to bring Shakespeare to YouTube in a way that was fun and accessible. My expectations were that they would make fun of the play with care; I was hoping that they wouldn’t mock Shakespeare, (or mock people who like Shakespeare). I was also hoping that they would critique the characters without outright mocking them and find ways to make the play connect to modern audiences. I think they achieved all those things and more!

Zach Kornfield, Eugene Yang, and Keith Habersberger known collectively as “The Try Guys” are a group of friends who seek out new experiences and share them with the world. They thrive on taking themselves out of their comfort zone and learning about the world through experiencing it firsthand in a funny, lighthearted way. As I said before, what could be more adventurous, daring, informative, and out of YouTube’s comfort zone than doing Shakespeare?

In a series of videos they explored Elizabethan clothing, stage combat, learning how to speak Shakespearean verse, and finally on August 10th, 2023, they performed “Romeo and Juliet” live on Youtube, with suggestions from the audience! With this post, I will discuss the evolution from these three videos, to the final show, which I got to see live on YouTube. I will discuss what I think worked, what didn’t, and how this production might influence future Shakespeare productions going forward!

Podcast About the SHow:

My Top Ten Moments:

Background on the Show

The original pitch for the play made it sound like a live YouTube event, but they made it even better by including a voting option where viewers could change some of the action and chose for instance, if they fought with swords or some other object, thus engaging the audience the whole time. This is what made this experience unique, (perhaps more than any other production), and I think in many ways this production could be an inspiration to educators and theater practitioners! My main critcism of the show is that, though it can be enjoyed by almost anybody, it is definitely not suitable for children, and nobody could get away with showing it in a classroom environment.

Costumes and Sets

The set for “Romeo and Juliet,” seems like an ordinary YouTube TV studio, in that it’s fairly small and it does not suggest any particular period. It kind of suggests somewhat of a dream-like environment; there are cardboard cut outs with some clouds, the lighting is warm with a few pink colors . Most of all it reminds me of a fractured fairytale more than classic tragedy, (which I suppose is clever in itself because it sets up that the Try Guys are going to fracture Shakespeare the same way people like the Muppets fractured fairy tales.

The costumes don’t seem as elaborate or historically accurate as the ones in the previous video, which is a shame because it would’ve been really nice to see the Try Guys walk, fight, and dance in the same costumes that they experimented with in the previous video. That said, the costumes certainly are functional within the story. Eugene as Mercutio has a stylish striking black outfit that certainly suggests somebody you don’t want to mess with. Zach as Romeo has an amusing long wig (romantically disheveled of course) and a blue doublet (though I miss the pumpkin pants in the previous video). As in other productions, the Montegues wear blue and the Capulets mostly wear red. I would be surprised if the director had seen the famous Franco Zephirelli film (or at least Gnomio and Juliet).

The director Keith Habersberger also keeps the best costumes for himself both as the Prince and Juliet; he’s wearing a beautiful ordinate gold costume as the Prince and Juliet herself has lovely rose-colored gowns. Even her shift in Act Four is it’s tasteful. I’ll talk more about Keith’s portrayal of Juliet later, but let’s just say that the clothes do not make him look like a man in women’s garb, they make him look like Juliet.

Stage Combat

The stage combat episode is great, and as a Stage Combat junkie myself, I watch a lot of channels like Skalgrim, Forged In Fire, HEMA videos, and of course my own stage combat videos. Consuming this combat content, I know that there are lots of avenues for education and for entertainment watching these 3 guys who have never done sage combat before, try out swords. I was very delighted to see them putter around with swords and then learn a short stage combat scene in which they then put on put their own spin on by improvising a scene where Romeo & Juliet sword fight with a guy who cut the cut in front of them while they were trying to get ice Cream. The video is fun, ludicrous, but also it’s just as informative as videos from the Folger Shakespeare Library.

Unfortunately, The Try Guys didn’t make much use of the swordplay they learned in this video during the final performance. Imagine my disappointment when, during the climactic duel between Tybalt and Mercutio, the audience voted to replace the swords with…something that was definitely NSFW. I’ll discuss this choice in depth later on my podcast but let’s just say it made the training they did in the previous episode seem like a waste of time.

The Cameos

Did you hear about this guy Romeo? He’s the talk of the town

Link Neal from Good Mythical Morning

One aspect of the production that I deeply loved was that instead of doing the whole play, The Try Guys did a 90-minute abridged version using multiple narrators to fill in with bits of exposition and commentary. The Reduced Shakespeare Company did this before in their show, but since The Try Guys are very popular in the YouTube Community, they got a bunch of their fellow Youtubers to be their narrators like Rhett and Link, Smosh Games, Rosario Pansino from Nerdy Nummies, and Mat Pat from Game Theory. It was absolutely delightful to hear more of my favorite YouTubers talk about my favorite writer, each one telling the story with their own brand of humor!

Romeo runs to Friar Laurence, mascara all smeared!

Manny Mua

The Performances:

Finally, let’s talk about the acting in the final performance and how the Try Guys succeded in bringing Shakespeare to You Tube.

Keith Habensburger as Juliet

Keith carries the show as Juliet. As he mentions in the video above, he has performed in Shakespeare before, and his passion for performing shines. It’s actually a bit shocking to see him drop his usual persona as an easy-going funny guy and become a tragic heroine! In addition, he has a clear vision for the character- I suspected that he would probably exploit the comedy of him being a man playing a woman and being taller than Zach and he does in the earlier scenes, but once Tybalt dies, Keith plays Juliet absolutely straight- he is absolutely committed to playing Juliet’s anguish and desperation and it’s really moving to watch!

Eugene As The Nurse/ Mercutio

Eugene was a natural choice for Mercutio- his Try Guys persona is very much the wild card, sometimes friendly and sometimes fierce and he clearly loves Shakespearean language as you can see in the earlier video where he plays Edmund from “King Lear.” Honestly, though, I think his performances in the final play are a bit under-dramatized- I don’t quite know what he was going for as either The Nurse or Mercutio, which might be a result of limited time or lack of direction. That said, he does a good job for having never done Shakespeare professionally before.

Zach as Romeo or “A Bro wearing Hose”

Zach admits in the Shakespeare Acadamy video that he doesn’t “get Shakespeare,” and I get the sense that he doesn’t really like Romeo, so his performance seems like an intentional parody of romantic leading men. Honestly, this is fine. Romeo isn’t my favorite Shakespearean character either, and yes, The Try Guys are treating this as a real show, but at the same time it is still an experiment; they are trying something they wouldn’t normally do, so Zach is dealing with the awkwardness of playing Romeo with the same self-deprecating sense of humor that he uses when baking without a recipe or trying ballet. He knows that he would never get cast as Romeo in real life, so he’s having a laugh while he does it onstage, all the while being the best Romeo he can be.

The Format

One of the biggest challenges any Shakespeare practitioner has to face with a modern audience is the problem of engagement. The age of social media has changed how we consume content- we don’t passively watch anymore, we engage with it, comment on it, share it, and sometimes even manipulate it for ourselves. In Shakespeare’s day, there was no division between actors and audiences so in a way, his plays work well for this kind of live choose-the-outcome YouTube Event and I’m interested to see if it influences future performances going forward. In any case, I’m grateful that I was able to see this fun-frenetic, once-in-a-lifetime evening of live theater!

If you would like to learn Shakespeare like the Try Guys, I have a series of online clases in acting, stage combat, Shakespearean comedies, tragedies, and of course, “Romeo and Juliet.” You can enroll in one of these classes now or schedule one with me by visiting my Outschool.com page:

My Top 10 Favorite Shakespeare/ Harry Potter Actors

| astronut1

This list is not about skill or the talent of the actor. This is to honor the contributions of Shakespearean actors who also appeared in one of my favorite film and book franchises of all time: Harry Potter. Accordingly, some of the actors who weren’t essential to either Harry Potter or Shakespeare or both are placed lower on the list even if I personally love the actor or the character they portrayed.

#10: Richard Harris- Albus Dumbledore

The Irish-born actor has been a veteran of stage and screen for decades before his death in 2002, after the second Harry Potter film. Here is him on Johnny Carson, telling a funny story about a production of Macbeth he did early in his career:

#9: Kenneth Branaugh- Gilderoy Lockheart

If you visit this website regularly, you know I’m a fan of Kenneth Branaugh– I’ve reviewed three of his Shakespeare movies and he’s my all-time favorite Hamlet. I’m also aware that he has a reputation of being a bit of an egotist and a womanizer, (since he had affairs with two women on this list), so even though he was a bit too old to play the part, it was nice to see him have a laugh at his own expense as the attention-hogging Gilderoy Lockheart. The humbug professor’s name actually Gilderoy (as in a man painted with false gold), gives away the twist that he takes credit for other witches and wizards’ work and Branaugh shamelessly mugs to the camera whenever he’s on screen. My favorite scene of his though, is the one serious scene where he teaches dueling with the help of the much more competent Professor Snape:

Kenneth Branaugh and Alan Rickman in Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets, (2002).

If you saw my post on the duel at the end of Hamlet, you can see that the way wizards duel is directly inspired by the way fencers fought in Hamlet, right down to the flashy salute and bow beforehand, and it’s neat to see two legendary Hamlets fight in it.

#8: Jim Broadbent (Horace Slughorn) / Timothy Spall (Peter Pettigrew [aka ‘Wormtail’]

I couldn’t decide between these fabulous actors, so I grouped them together. After seeing Timothy Spall as the cowardly, foolish incompetent spy and traitor Rosencrantz in Hamlet, I knew that the only Harry Potter role for him would be as Lord Voldemort’s toady and pathetic rat, Peter Pettigrew, aka Wormtail.

Broadbent on the other hand, is completely different and unrecognizable during his excellent portrayal of Lord Buckingham in Ian McKellen’s 1995 film version of Shakespeare’s Richard III. Unlike the meek and easily broken Horace Slughorn, Broadbent as Buckingham is an oily politician who very nearly sells his soul to McKellen’s diabolical Richard:

What unites these two portrayals is that both characters are corrupted by a figure of pure evil, but both have a breaking point- Buckingham, (as you see in the clip above), refuses to be a party to child murder, while Slughorn eventually helps Harry Potter destroy Voldemort. In a way, they’re two sides of a very flawed coin.

#7 Michael Gambon (Albus Dumbledore 2)

Like Richard Harris, Michael Gambon, (who passed away in September of 2023) was an accomplished stage and screen actor, famous for playing King Lear multiple times, including a famous performance with Antony Sher at the Royal Shakespeare Company. Here are some highlights of his stage work:

https://www.theguardian.com/stage/gallery/2015/feb/09/michael-gambon-on-stage-from-king-lear-to-krapp-in-pictures

#6: Fiona Shaw (Petunia Dursley)

I feel I have to give Fiona Shaw a good spot on this list, though I think her talent was wasted in the role of Petunia Dursley. She is an icon of British theater and her work in Shakespeare is superb. She famously played Richard II back in 1995, and in the short film below, she talks about her amazing interpretation of Measure For Measure, with fellow Harry Potter alumn, David Tennant.

I’d also like to include the best-deleted scene from Deathly Hallows with Shaw in it, where she admits to Harry for the first time that she misses her sister Lilly.

#5: Ralph Fiennes (Lord Voldemort)

In a way, Lord Voldemort was a role that Fiennes had trained for all his life. He has played smarmy, serpentine characters before in films like Red Dragon and Schindler’s List. But Fiennes’ Shakespeare training allowed him to tap into the evil megalomaniac at the heart of Voldemort when he played roles like Richard III, (another deformed autocrat), and Coriolanus, the Roman general who is himself compared to a dragon. In the video above, YouTube critic Kyle Kalgren analyzes how Fiennes’ past roles and experience with Shakespeare translated well in his performance and his direction of the 2011 film Coriolanus.

#4 Imelda Stanton (Delores Umbridge)

By contrast, I give more credit to Imelda Stanton, who mainly plays sweet mom-like characters (or nurse-like in the case of Shakespeare In Love), for embodying the utterly loathsome Delores Umbridge. Reportedly, the role made Stanton feel physically ill and unlike Richard III, people hate her character with a passion. By contrast, look at her sweet and charming portrayal of Maria in the 1996 film Twelfth Night, (which also starred Helena Bonham Carter):

#3 Helena Bonham Carter (Bellatrix Lestrange)/ Emma Thompson (Sybyl Trelawney)

Again, I had to give credit to both of these women for the startling transformations they did for their Harry Potter characters, as well as their stellar work in Shakespeare. Helena Bonham Carter mainly plays apealing aristocratic characters such as Olivia in Twelfth Night, and Ophelia in Hamlet:

Seeing Ms. Carter as the demented Bellatrix Lestrange was quite a shock for me, yet the performance was no less impressive. I especially love this scene in Deathly Hallows where she has to act like a 17 year old girl, TRYING TO BE BELLATRIX LESTRANGE

#2: Alan Rickman (Severus Snape)

I already wrote a tribute to Alan Rickman after his death in 2016, so I don’t wish to repeat myself. Suffice it to say that Mr. Rickman was always a consummate professional, and his iconic portrayal of Severus Snape was the performance of a lifetime.

    Alan Rickman as Achilles in Troilus and Cressida, Royal Shakespeare Company.

    Honorable Mention: David Tennent (Barty Crouch)

    To be honest, I thought Tennant was miscast in Harry Potter- he can play villains, (as Good Omens fans know well), but he just isn’t great at being maniacal and evil. That said, Tennant is a rising Shakespearean star and has created many memorable performances from Richard II, to Benedick in Much Ado About Nothing, to Hamlet.

    #1: Dame  Maggie Smith (Professor McGonigal)

    Say it with me… you probably saw this coming. No one can deny that Dame Maggie’s contributions to Shakespeare, as well as her ubiquitous portrayal of Hogwarts’ current Headmistress Minerva McGonigal, stand the test of time as strongly as the animated chess pieces she placed in the school basement. Let’s look at some of her greatest Shakespearean moments.

    Plug for my Acting Class

    If you enjoyed this list, you might want to sign up for my Intro to Acting class or my extended acting course, where I delve into Shakespearean acting techniques, and answer the big question, “WHY DO SHAKESPEAREAN ACTORS KEEP GETTING CAST AS WITCHES AND WIZARDS?” To sign up, click the link below: https://outschool.com/classes/609658d1-3f9f-4371-8af2-4fe81ad13d8c

    Cover art for my Outschool Beginning Acting Class.

    Thanks for reading!

    Crafting a Character: Puck

    | astronut1

    “Welcome Spirit, How Camest Thou hither?” The sources for Puck

    Puck, in medieval English folklore, a malicious fairy or demon. In Old and Middle English the word meant simply “demon.” In Elizabethan lore he was a mischievous, brownielike fairy also called Robin Goodfellow, or Hobgoblin. As one of the leading characters in William Shakespeare’s Midsummer Night’s Dream, Puck boasts of his pranks of changing shapes, misleading travelers at night, spoiling milk, frightening young girls, and tripping venerable old dames. The Irish pooka, or púca, and the Welsh pwcca are similar household spirits.

    Britannica, The Editors of Encyclopaedia. “puck”. Encyclopedia Britannica, 21 Apr. 2016, https://www.britannica.com/topic/puck-fairy. Accessed 18 July 2023.

    Shakespeare also took inspiration from English poet Edmund Spencer, who visited Ireland in the 1590s and adapted the folklore he picked up into his opera The Fairy Queen, which Shakespeare adapted into A Midsummer Night’s Dream

    Types of fairies you can “spot” at the Lullymore Park in Ireland:

    Puck/Robin’s Dual Nature

    The old stories tell that Fairies are magical creatures who live in hollow places in the earth. Some are benevolent and help give rain and pleasant weather to the Earth, Like the king and Queen of the fairies, Oberon and Titania:

    And the mazed world,
    By their [the tides] increase, now knows not which is which:
    And this same progeny of evils comes
    From our debate, from our dissension;
    We are their parents and original.

    — Titania, (Queen of the Faries), A Midsummer Night’s Dream Act II, Scene i.

    Titania in this speech shows great concern for nature, humanity, and the planet. She believes it is the responsibility of fairies, particularly herself and her husband Oberon, to control the elements and keep humans and fairies safe. Some fairies, however, are cruel and enjoy playing tricks on mortals, just like Puck in A Midsummer Night’s Dream, or Queen Mab in Romeo and Juliet.

    • Close reading of Puck’s speech (MND II, i)
    • Close reading of Puck’s speech (MND II, i)
    • Close reading of Puck’s speech (MND II, i)
    • Close reading of Puck’s speech (MND II, i)
    • Close reading of Puck’s speech (MND II, i)

    .

    This is a short analysis I created of the tricks Puck plays on people in A Midsummer Night’s Dream, as part of my acting course on Ouschool.com. Note the different ways Puck is portrayed in photos as a satyr, a rotund elf, and sometimes as an almost- demon like figure.

    Punishments or contracts with fairies formed a significant part of Goodfellow’s purpose on earth. While he could issue good fortune and support, this was always at the cost of those involved. As Reginald Scot commented, Goodfellow had a ‘standing fee’ of a ‘mess of white bread and milk’, which he expected after supporting housewives with their chores. If his payment was forgotten, Goodfellow was believed to steal from the home that owed him, often stealing grain and milk from the dairy.

    Abigail Sparkes, Historic UK.com

    Performing Puck

    Because Puck is not human, and somewhat ambiguous in the text, an actor can play Puck in many different ways. Generally speaking, actors tend to explore Puck’s attitude toward humans, their love of mischief, and how to translate that physically and vocally

    Puck. My mistress with a monster is in love.
    Near to her close and consecrated bower,
    While she was in her dull and sleeping hour,
    A crew of patches, rude mechanicals,
    Were met together to rehearse a play
    The shallowest thick-skin of that barren sort,
    Who Pyramus presented, in their sport
    Forsook his scene and enter’d in a brake
    When I did him at this advantage take,
    An ass’s nole I fixed on his head:

    Anon his Thisbe must be answered,
    And forth my mimic comes.
    So, at his sight, away his fellows fly;
    And, at our stamp, here o’er and o’er one falls;
    He murder cries and help from Athens calls.
    I led them on in this distracted fear,
    And left sweet Pyramus translated there:
    When in that moment, so it came to pass,
    Titania waked and straightway loved an ass!

    slideshare id=52829293&doc=randj-150916030030-lva1-app6891]

    References:

    Shapiro, James. A Year In the Life Of William Shakespeare, 1599. Chapter 6: Things Dying and Things Reborn.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/articles/3fLDRSY7r9rJhrVFWy99Mly/transcript-shakespeares-restless-world-programme-7

    https://www.independent.ie/entertainment/theatre-arts/is-shakespeare-responsible-for-the-stage-irishman-34638347.html

    https://www.irishtimes.com/culture/stage/what-ish-my-nation-shakespeare-s-irish-connections-1.2619173

    Richard the Third and Toxic Masculinity

    | astronut1

    This past month, there was a free production of Richard III in New York’s Shakespeare In the Park, starring Danai Gurira as the title character. I have not seen this production, though I wish I had. I enjoyed the actress Ms. Gurrira in such films as “Black Panther,” and would love to see her do Shakespeare. What is more, the concept intrigues me. This project explores themes of toxic masculinity, racial identity, inferiority, and misogyny.

    Danai Gurira as Richard III, Shakespeare in the Park, 2024

    https://www.npr.org/2022/07/10/1110359040/why-it-matters-that-danai-gurira-is-taking-on-richard-iii

    Unsurprisingly, with so many heady topics in the production, this Richard III is still somewhat controversial. Some right-wing critics dismissed the whole production as a piece of ‘woke propaganda,’ but I feel this is unfair.

    When Danai Gurira of Marvel’s “Black Panther” first takes the stage in the title role, the actress has no perceivable hunchback or arm trouble. And yet the dialogue suggesting Richard suffers from a lifelong physical issue (“rudely stamped”) has been kept in. Perhaps we are to use our imaginations. Who knows? We are certainly tempted to close our eyes.

    By Johnny Oleksinski

    I will not judge this production based on the acting because I haven’t been able to see it. What I will do is take a stance on the validity of the concept. Specifically, I want to ask if this play is a good examination of toxic masculinity and if it would it be worthwhile to see it portrayed by a black woman, as opposed to a white man. The short answer is an emphatical “Yes.”

    https://variety.com/2022/legit/features/danai-gurira-richard-iii-toxic-masculinity-central-park-1235318196/

    Richard’s Toxic Masculity

    Richard III is definately an example of toxic masculinity. He is violent, full of hatred, vengeance, and mysogeny. He is constantly insulting women from Lady Anne, Jane Shore, Queen Elizabeth, and even his own mother. In fact, the source of Richard’s toxic attitude is that he blames his mother for his disability and deformity:

    Well, say there is no kingdom then for Richard;1635
    What other pleasure can the world afford?
    I'll make my heaven in a lady's lap,
    And deck my body in gay ornaments,
    And witch sweet ladies with my words and looks.
    O miserable thought! and more unlikely1640
    Than to accomplish twenty golden crowns!
    Why, love forswore me in my mother's womb:
    And, for I should not deal in her soft laws,
    She did corrupt frail nature with some bribe,
    To shrink mine arm up like a wither'd shrub;1645
    To make an envious mountain on my back,
    Where sits deformity to mock my body;
    To shape my legs of an unequal size;
    To disproportion me in every part,
    Like to a chaos, or an unlick'd bear-whelp1650
    That carries no impression like the dam.
    And am I then a man to be beloved?
    O monstrous fault, to harbour such a thought!. 3H6, Act III, Scene i, lines 1635-1653.

    Now I should clarify the difference between deformity and disability, which are characteristics that Richard III has as part of his character makeup. According to the Americans With Disabilities Act, a disability is defined as: “A physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities.” This could include paralysis, autism, or any number of congenital or acquired conditions. Richard’s disability is primarily his limp (caused by his unequally shaped limbs), and his withered arm. What’s interesting in this production is that while the title role is played by an able-bodied woman, most of the rest of the cast have actual disabilites. Watch this clip of the famous courtship scene between Richard and Lady Anne, who plays her role in a wheel-chair.

    While a disability is a legal term that is recognized by lawyers and governments alike, the term “deformity” is more subjective; it generally refers to any kind of cosmetic imperfection. In Richard III, this applies to Richard’s hump and withered arm. 

    The Elizabethans thought that deformity was a sign of disfavor from God, and that deformed people were constantly at odds with God and nature, as Francis Bacon puts it in his essay, “On Deformity.”

    As deformed people are physically impaired by nature; they, in turn, devoid themselves of ‘natural affection’ by being unmerciful and lacking emotions for others. By doing so, they get their revenge on nature and hence achieve stability.

    Richard III has this drive for revenge in spades and I believe it manifests itself as a particularly terrible form of toxic masculinity. Richard definitely wants the crown to make up for his lack of ‘natural affection,’ but he is also especially malevolent towards women.

    I, that am rudely stamp’d, and want love’s majesty

    To strut before a wanton ambling nymph;

    And therefore, since I cannot prove a lover,

    To entertain these fair well-spoken days,

    I am determined to prove a villain

    And hate the idle pleasures of these days

    Seeing a woman play this kind of misogynist dialogue forces the audience to take it out of context and question Richard’s point of view. We see casual misogyny every day, and seeing a woman deliver it is quite illuminating.

    Richard’s deformity and Blackness

    Another provocative choice by Danai Gurira’s portrayal of Richard is the fact that she plays the role of Richard without the hump or withered arm. She herself explains that for her production, Richard’s perceived deformity, is actually represented by her being a black woman:

    He’s dealing with the otherness compared to his family, in terms of not being Caucasian and fair like them.” The word ‘fair’, is used a lot in the play.

    Danai Gurira’s

    Shakespeare writes Richard as constantly striving to compensate for his deformities by being clever, violent, and eventually, by becoming king. As I wrote before in my review of Othello, for centuries black people have been portrayed as inferior; aberrations of the ‘ideal fair-skinned form’. So, to the Elizabethans, blackness itself was a form of deformity, and the rawness of addressing this uncomfortable fact in this production should be commended.

    English people are already trained—and we have scholars like Anthony Barthelemy has talked about this in his book Black Face, Maligned Race, where the image of blackness, as associated with sin, with the devil, all of these things, makes it quite easy to map onto then Black people these kinds of characteristics. Then, those kinds of characteristics allow for the argument that these people are fit to be enslaved. – Dr. Ambereen Dadabhoy, Race and Blackness in Elizabethan England Shakespeare Unlimited: Episode 168

    https://www.folger.edu/shakespeare-unlimited/elizabethan-race-blackness-dadabhoy

    So while I can’t speak to the production’s acting or staging, I will emphatically defend the notion that this production’s concept is valid. Richard III is an example of toxic masculinity through his self-hatred, violence, misogyny, and narcissism. In addition, as I’ve written before, in the Early Modern Period, blackness was considered an aberration or deformity, and seeing it in the person of Richard, with the implicit understanding that black people still face this kind of prejudice today, opens a much-needed dialogue that any production of Shakespeare shouldn’t be afraid to open.

    In short, by re-contextualizing Richard’s deformity and disabilities, this production gets to the heart of the play’s moral for our times. The early modern period’s toxic attitudes towards deformity and disability created the Renaissance monster of Richard III. We in the 21st century must examine our own societal prejudices and toxic attitudes so this monster does not come to haunt us in real life.