With the upcoming release of The Mandalorian and Grogo, I knew there would be lots of tie-in Star Wars merchandise capitalizing on it. What I didn’t expect, was that, after a six year hiatus, playwright Ian Doescher has once again taken up his quills and lightsabers to dramatize the next installment in the Shakespearean Star Wars cannon, The Mandalorian of Nevarro.
What Is William Shakespeare’s Star Wars?
William Shakespeare’s Star Wars is a series of parody plays written by Ian Doescher that takes the prose screenplays of the Star Wars story and transforms them into Elizabethan verse. Last time, I mentioned how much I loved the cheeky references to Shakespeare and Star Wars, and how Doescher adapts the cinematic quality into Elizabethan drama very well. In my podcast, I also emphasized the way Doescher gives each character verbose Shakespearan language that works very well for radio and theater:
I’ve written reviews about Mr Doescher’s versions of the original trilogy, but I never expected him to cover the Disney Plus shows, bit he proved me wrong, and by all accounts, this edition lives up to its predecessors.
Interview with Ian Doescher about “The Mandalorian of Nevarro”
What We Know
I haven’t gotten a copy yet of the full play, so this will be less of a review and more of a prediction and a fun speculation about how Mr Doescher will handle everyone’s favorite green foster child and Beskar- clad dad.
When your main character is, quite frankly, one of the most non-theatrical Star Wars protagonists in existence, forcing that character to come out of his shell and give him that Shakespearean flair was always going to be a test. – Nate Manning, Star Wars News.net
The Mandalorian of Nevarro is a two part series that, like the other William Shakespeare’s Star Wars books, adapts the prose text of episodes 1-4 into Shakespeare’s verse. According to Wookiepedia, the series was originally titled Mandalorius, which is probably a pun on Shakespeare’s play Coriolanus
Prologue and Dramatis Personae for “The Mandalorian of Nevarro”
What We Can Guess
One thing I am very curious about is how far Doescher adapted Coriolanus for Mandolorian. As you might have read in my review for Coriolanus, one reason why the play isn’t as popular as some of Shakespeare’s other tragedies is simply that its hero is not very compelling. Coriolanus is not as articulate or wise as Hamlet, nor does his journey form a cohesive arc like Macbeth or Othello. He seems to flit between loving Rome and hating it, between peace and war, with little agency or understanding of what is happening to him, and even less insight. He is mainly a maddeningly inscrutable man, almost as if he was wearing a mask.
With all this in mind, I can honestly understand why Doescher might choose the Roman general Caius Martius Coriolanus as a model for Jinn Jaran, (assuming that the final play does in fact do so). Like Coriolanus, Mando is a lone warrior in a fragile republic, who goes from planet to planet with nothing but his ship, and his rigid code of behavior to guide him. Therefore it makes total sense that Doescher would use Coriolanus as a model to emulate when adapting The Mandalorian.
With all due respect to Shakespeare, what makes Mando a more interesting character from Coriolanus us that he has a compelling Arc. He starts as a solitary bounty hunter to a surrogate father who finds meaning when he adopts a child. It’s like his helmet and armor are metaphors for the uncaring, uncompromising person he was. Over the course of the series, as Mando becomes a better man and a better father, he is forced to remove his armor and form real relationships.
What I Hope
I hope this adaptation uses Shakespeare’s ability to conjure images and feelings when telling Mando’s story, but only time will tell.
Today is the Ides o fMarch, a day that history still bewares, because of the infamous day when armed, violent conspirators went to the Senate and attempted to overthrow elected rulers. For obvious reasons, this put me in mind of the heinous actions of another group of conspirators stormed another Senate and tried to overthrow a stable republic.
January 6th, 2021 (which, coincidently, was Twelfth Night, one of my favorite Shakespeare-themed holidays), was a tragedy for multiple reasons. The protestors broke windows, destroyed furniture, defaced statues, broke into both chambers of Congress, and probably would have harmed lawmakers, in a violent protest of both the US presidential election and the Senate vote in Georgia that week.
Let me be clear, this was sedition and treason and everyone involved should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. Anyone who says otherwise is blatantly attacking our cherished democracy, and spitting in the face of the rule of law. Unfortunately, Republicans in both chambers have been unwilling to condemn their actions for fear of alienating their base. If this is what the Republican party has come to, the party doesn’t deserve the name. A republic protects the right of the people to elect its representatives and dedicates itself to the peaceful transition of power. Left unchallenged, groups like this will bring anarchy and tyranny to our country.
How do I know this? Because it happened before. Shakespeare has long dramatized real historic events where people rise up against their governments (for better or worse). In all cases, whether protesting a famine, a war, or a cruel tyrannical usurper, the riots never accomplish anything except bringing chaos and bloodshed. Sometimes these ignorant rioters are goaded by charismatic powerful figures, but these upper-class characters are only exploiting the rioters, using their violence as a way to get power for themselves. So, let’s examine the language, tactics, and effects of rioters in three of Shakespeare’s plays: Julius Caesar, Henry VI Part III, and Sir Thomas More:
Example 1: Julius Caesar
(c) Hartlepool Museums and Heritage Service; Supplied by The Public Catalogue Foundation
As I covered before in my “Friends, Romans, Countrymen,” post, during Antony’s famous funeral speech, he galvanizes the Roman crowd, first to mourn Caesar, then to revenge his death. How do they do this? By burning the houses of the conspirators and rioting in the street. They even kill a man just because he has the same name as one of the conspirators:
What does this violence accomplish? Nothing. Caesar is still dead. Brutus is still alive (though on the run). Antony merely wished to punish Brutus, and get the mob to hate him while he secretly cheats them out of their money. In Act Four, Antony becomes the de facto ruler of Rome because he leveraged his performance at the funeral, and uses his newfound powers to take money away from the citizens that Caesar promised to give them in his will. He manipulated them for his own purposes and duped them for political power.
Example 2: Jack Cade in Henry VI, Part ii.
Henry VI is the only king in English history to be crowned twice, deposed twice, and buried twice (Saccio 91). As the play begins, King Henry has already lost France, lost his mind, and lost the respect of his people. Around 1455, John Hardyng wrote a contrast between Henry’s father and himself. He laments that Henry the Fifth died so soon and then exhorts Henry to keep the quarrelsome lords in his government from warring among themselves.
Withstand, good lord, the outbreak of debates. And chastise well also the rioters Who in each shire are now confederates Against your peace, and all their maintainers For truly else will fall the fairest flowers Of your great crown and noble monarchy Which God defend and keep through his mercy.
(Excerpt from Harding’s Chronicle, English Historical Documents, 274).
Henry’s political ineptness was why Richard of York challenged his claim to the throne. Though Richard had little legal claim as king, he believed himself to be better than Henry.
In Shakespeare’s play Henry VI, Part ii, York tries to get the people’s support by engineering a crisis that he can easily solve. York dupes a man named Jack Cade to start a riot in London and demand that the magistrates crown Cade as the true king.
Biography of Richard, Duke of York, who challenged King Henry VI for his right to be king.
York and Cade start a conspiracy theory that Cade is the true heir to the throne and the royal family suppressed his claim and lied about his identity. Cade starts calling himself John Mortimer, a distant uncle of the king whom York himself admits is long dead:
The Royal National Theater’s production of Henry VI, Parts II, and 7. Jack Cade appears at about the 7-minute mark.
And this fell tempest shall not cease to rage Until the golden circuit on my head, Like to the glorious sun's transparent beams, Do calm the fury of this mad-bred flaw. And, for a minister of my intent, I have seduced a headstrong Kentishman, John Cade of Ashford, To make commotion, as full well he can, Under the title of John Mortimer.
Just like Cade and his rebels, the January 6th rioters were motivated by lies and conspiracies designed to crush their faith in their legitimate ruler. Even more disturbing, these rioters are pawns in the master plan of a corrupt political group. York doesn’t care that Cade isn’t the real king; he just wants to use Cade’s violence as an excuse to raise an army, one that he can eventually use against King Henry himself.
15th century woodcut from the War Of the Roses.
Similar to York’s lies and conspiracy-mongering, many Republicans have refused to accept the legitimacy of Joe Biden’s election, and some are actual proponents of Q Anon conspiracies!
A lot of Republicans deserve blame for fanning the flames of rebellion on January 6th, but arguably former President Trump deserves most of the blame. Even Rush Limbaugh admitted that Trump spread a huge amount of conspiracy theories without believing in any of them. He does this because he wants Americans to be afraid of imaginary threats that he claims he can solve. What’s easier to solve than a problem that doesn’t exist? Much like York, Trump tried to hold onto power by pressuring his supporters to pressure the Capital, feeding them lies about election fraud, and a secret democratic Satanic cult. Thus radicalized, they resolved to do what Cade’s mob did: “Kill all the lawyers.” Unfortunately, there are a lot of lawyers in the Senate.
As Dick the Butcher points out, most people don’t actually believe Cade is truly John Mortimer, they are just so angry at the king and the oppressive English government, that they are willing to follow him in a violent mob to take their vengeance upon the monarchy. This is why they try Lord Saye and execute him just for the crime of reading and writing! Similarly, the mob attacking the capital was made up of die-hard conspiracy adherents, and people just angry at the Democratic Party.
Like I said before, Cade and his mob is just a pawn in the machinations of York. Eventually the king’s enforcer, Lord Clifford convinces most of them to abandon Cade, and Cade himself dies a humiliating death- on the run from the law and starving, Cade is murdered by a farmer after trying to steal some food. After Joe Biden became the 46th President, many of the conspiracy group Q-Anon, who had many prominent members in the January 6th riot, began to disbelieve and abandon the conspiracies of the group. However, as this news story shows, some Q-Anon supporters are die-hard adherents and will never abandon their conspiracy theories, and some, like York’s supporters, are being recruited by other extreme groups. Sadly, as York shows, sometimes a riot is a rehearsal for another riot. In Shakespeare’s Henry VI, Part III, York finally amasses an army and challenges the Lancastrians in all-out war. Hopefully, the US government will hunt down and arrest these violent insurrectionists before they have the chance to do the same.
Example 3: Sir Thomas More
In the unfinished play “Sir Thomas More, a racist mob again attempts to attack London. This time they have no political pretenses; they want to lynch immigrants who they believe are taking English jobs. As I said in my “Who Would Shakespeare Vote For?” post, More’s speech is a perfect explanation of why this behavior cheapens and denigrated a country’s image, and weakens its ability to command respect from the rest of the world. Last time I posted a video of Sir Ian McKellen speaking this speech, but this time.. well just watch:
In many ways, Medieval Times is a campy, theme park-esque place. Don’t get me wrong, I love this place, and both Puppet Shakespeare and I enjoyed it immensely. From a historical perspective, however, Medieval Times has more in common with Disney Land than British history. That said, it still contains a nod to this ancient culture that praised and highly ritualized the concept of judicial combat.
The Court
You are cast as a lord or lady, representing a fantasy kingdom (which corresponds to the color of the crown you wear). I was fortunate to get the Red crown for Valentines Day, and was seated right next to the King and Queen (more on that later). The hall was decorated with colored banners and each kingdom was introduced with trumpets and flags. The feast was a celebration of the uniting of all the surrounding kingdoms under the King and Queen. As the king and queen came out, everyone cheered and the royals toasted each kingdom and praised and thanked them all for their service to the crown. The monarchs then promised each lord and lady there a greater reward with sports, games, spectacles, and of course, the feast itself.
Feudalism
Map of the kingdoms in England during the Wars of the Roses
As I mentioned in my Game of Thrones post, a king’s main job was to unite all the lords in the land and get them swear fealty to him, binding the whole country under the crown. It was King Henry VI’s failure to keep the lords in line that resulted in the civil war known as the Wars of the Roses. Feasts like the one in Medieval Times, were essentially propaganda to keep the lords allied with the king. They demonstrated the power of the king and communicated loudly and clearly that the lands would be stronger together, as opposed to endless war. So, this kind of pageantry was political as well as entertaining, and the king and queen’s dialogue preserves the purpose of this kind of feast, which as a history nerd, I deeply appreciated.
Court Sport
While we waited for the feast, the knights entertained the court with displays of their skills and strength. They rode towards the quintain and hit it with their lances, threw spears at a target, and even their horses got a chance to trot without riders, showing how well trained they were.
The knights practice throwing spears at the target
The Joust
Shakespeare’s Pericles, Prince Of Tyre has a very elaborate and detailed depiction of how jousts worked in the Medieval and Renaissance eras. Shakespeare knew that the joust was the ultimate display of skill, chivarly, and the ideals of courtly love. Knights were portrayed as romantic heroes who fought for a simple favor from a lady such as a rose or handkerchief and each one defined himself by his strict code of honor and virtue. All these traditions are hightlighted in the scene where Pericles fights in a tournament to gain the love of the princess Taisa:
Enter A pavilion for the [p]reception of King, Princess, Lords, &c.
[Enter SIMONIDES, THAISA, Lords, and Attendants]
Simonides. Are the knights ready to begin the triumph? First Lord. They are, my liege;750 And stay your coming to present themselves. Simonides. Return them, we are ready; and our daughter, In honour of whose birth these triumphs are, Sits here, like beauty's child, whom nature gat For men to see, and seeing wonder at.755 [Exit a Lord]
Thaisa. It pleaseth you, my royal father, to express My commendations great, whose merit's less. Simonides. It's fit it should be so; for princes are A model which heaven makes like to itself:760 As jewels lose their glory if neglected, So princes their renowns if not respected. 'Tis now your honour, daughter, to explain The labour of each knight in his device. Thaisa. Which, to preserve mine honour, I'll perform.765 [Enter a Knight; he passes over, and his Squire] presents his shield to the Princess] Simonides. Who is the first that doth prefer himself? Thaisa. A knight of Sparta, my renowned father; And the device he bears upon his shield770 Is a black Ethiope reaching at the sun The word, 'Lux tua vita mihi.' Simonides. He loves you well that holds his life of you. [The Second Knight passes over]
Chivalric ideals aside, the joust also had a practical purpose- it was a way for knights to train for war, an a way for them to win fame, money, and good reputations at court. As you can see in the photos above, the knights were separated by a wooden barrier called “the tilt wall.” Each knight was identified by the colorful designs on their banners, shields, and the blanket draped over the horse. Once the king or marshal threw down the warder, the knights charged headfirst at their opponents, armed with shields, lances, and full armor. Knights scored points for breaking lances and shields or by knocking other knights off their horses. Naturally, to create the most impressive display possible, all the knights at Medieval Times fell off their horses and no lances broke.
First, and most important, was the Joust Royal, or "tilting," in which mounted knights armed with lances charged at their opponents across a barrier. This was followed by a "tourney" in which mounted knights ran at each other without a tilt barrier (as pictured here).> Combatants armed with spears and swords also fought on foot over a barrier Best, Michael. "Chivalry and Duels." Internet Shakespeare Editions, University of Victoria, 28 Sept. 2016, ise.uvic.ca/Foyer/citing. Accessed 30 Sept. 2016.
The Lance
The video above is from Weapons That Made Brittain, in which historian and reinactor Mike Loads, explains with vivid details, how Knights learned how to master the art of the Lance, and how the Lance became one of the most important weapons of the knight.
Duels
In the climax of the evening, the knights stopped fighting for sport, and started fighting for power! The Green Knight (as green with envy as his armor and horse), suddenly refused to dismount from his horse and began striking knights left and right. He then challenged the leadership of the king, threatening to rebel from the kingdom, along with his fellow knights! The king then decided to choose a champion to fight the Green Knight to the death! The Red Knight, (who as I mentioned before, represented my kingdom, and threw a rose as a favor to my family), picked up the glove of the envious Green Knight, thus signifying that he would be the champion, and fight for the fate of the kingdom!
Why the Green Knight?
Illustration from Sir Gawain and the Green Knight, 14th century.
At the hall door comes a frightening figure, He must have been taller than anyone in the world: From the neck to the waist so huge and thick, And his loins and limbs so long and massive, That I would say he was half a giant on earth. But more than anything His color amazed them: A bold knight riding, The whole of him bright green.Sir Gawain and the Green Knight
In most (but not all) interviews and clips I’ve seen, the Green Knight is the bad guy- the one Knight whom almost everyone is supposed to root against. When I got home, I wondered why this was. After all, isn’t the black knight usually associated with villainy? My personal theory is that this is a subtle reference to the classic medieval story, Sir Gawain and the Green Knight. The eponymous Knight is supernaturally strong and able to even survive decapitation! He serves in the story, as the ultimate test for our young hero, Sir Gawain. I think the writers of Medieval Times definitely did their homework, making this Knight the antagonist.
The duel began on horses, but quickly changed to single combat on foot. They fought with axes, maces, and of course swords.
Even though dueling was a bloody and dangerous pastime, it has a long history that even kings couldn’t erase. Back in Anglo-Saxon times, private disputes, (such as the murder of one’s father) could be settled through means of a duel. In this period, England was occupied by the Danes, (which we would now call Vikings), and several Viking practices of judicial combat survive. For example, the Hólmgangan, an elaborate duel between two people who fight within the perimeter of a cloak. These kinds of fights continued throughout medieval Europe and, like Medieval Times Shakespeare knew their devastating dramatic potential.
At the end of Shakespeare’s Hamlet, the revenge cycle between Hamlet, Leartes, and Fortinbras, comes to a close using a duel. Hamlet has murdered Leartes’ father but Hamlet did not intentionally kill him. This kind of legal dispute would certainly have been settled with a duel in Saxon times. This is one reason why Leartes scorns Hamlet’s offer of forgiveness at the beginning of the scene, and instead trusts in the outcome of the fight to prove his cause. Hamlet and Leartes begin fighting officially under the terms of a friendly fencing match, but it becomes clear early on that at least in the mind of Leartes, this is actually a blood-combat. Laertes is demanding blood for the death of his father, and like the Green Knight, his fight will decide the fate of the Danish throne.
Hamlet. Come for the third, Laertes! You but dally. Pray you pass with your best violence; I am afeard you make a wanton of me.
[Laertes wounds Hamlet; then] in scuffling, they change rapiers, [and Hamlet wounds Laertes].
[Laertes falls.]
By the Renaissance, dueling was highly controlled by traditions of honor and fair play. As Laertes admits, poisoning Hamlet and fighting him to the death without his knowledge would be considered treason, and highly dishonorable. The Green Knight does every possible thing to make the audience see him as the villain with his lack of courtesy, dirty tricks, and disdain for the king and queen. He is so dishonorable that, even Americans, who have nothing but disdain for monarchy and in real life, value independence and self-sovereignty, would rather take the side of the monarch and his stooge the Red Knight over the Green Knight, just because he refuses to play fair.
I’m coaching a young actress who is performing a monologue from one of Shakespeare’s histories, his play Henry VI, Part I. It’s likely you know the character, even if you don’t know the play- Joan LaPucelle, aka Joan of Arc. In this post, I will compare and contrast the historical Joan from Shakespeare’s version, and further attempt to separate the real woman from her legendary status as the patron Saint of France.
Shakespeare’s Joan
Shakespeare’s younger sister was also named Joan, and it’s possible she might have inspired Shakespeare’s decision to write about Joan the Maid. Recently, a document called A Spiritual Testimony, (long attributed to Shakespeare’s father), is now believed to be proof that Shakespeare’s little sister was a devout Catholic, at a time when doing so could incur ruinous fines and the risk of arrest for sedition and heresy. Given the courage of Joan’s convictions, perhaps her elder brother infused some of her zeal when writing the character of Joan in Henry VI, part I.
The Life of Joan
One life is all we have, and we live it as we believe in living it. But to sacrifice what you are and to live without belief, that is a fate more terrible than dying. -Joan of Arc
Joan LaPucelle, (Joan the Maid) was a controversial figure even in the 15th century. To the English, (and even some of the French), she was a witch, and a cruel warrior who took away rightful English territory. To others, she was a hero and a saint.
What I hope to do in this post is provide you with details about the life of Joan of Arc. Next I will compare and contrast the most iconic portrayals. I would argue that the success of each interpretation depends on how the writer, director, and of course, the actress playing Joan, answer these questions.
Shakespeare’s Version of Joan La Pucelle
Charles, King of France. Go, call her in. [Exit BASTARD OF ORLEANS]255 But first, to try her skill, Reignier, stand thou as Dauphin in my place: Question her proudly; let thy looks be stern: By this means shall we sound what skill she hath. [Re-enter the BASTARD OF ORLEANS, with JOAN LA PUCELLE]
Reignier. Fair maid, is't thou wilt do these wondrous feats? Joan la Pucelle. Reignier, is't thou that thinkest to beguile me? Where is the Dauphin? Come, come from behind; I know thee well, though never seen before. Be not amazed, there's nothing hid from me:265 In private will I talk with thee apart. Stand back, you lords, and give us leave awhile. Reignier. She takes upon her bravely at first dash.
Joan appears in the first part of Shakespeare’s epic saga of four plays about the Wars of the Roses. It is King Henry’s inability to defend his lands in France against Joan’s valiant attacks that helped trigger the Civil War, where the House of York fight to take the crown away from the incompetent King Henry VI.
Joan la Pucelle. Dauphin, I am by birth a shepherd's daughter, My wit untrain'd in any kind of art.270 Heaven and our Lady gracious hath it pleased To shine on my contemptible estate: Lo, whilst I waited on my tender lambs, And to sun's parching heat display'd my cheeks, God's mother deigned to appear to me275 And in a vision full of majesty Will'd me to leave my base vocation And free my country from calamity: Her aid she promised and assured success: In complete glory she reveal'd herself;280 And, whereas I was black and swart before, With those clear rays which she infused on me That beauty am I bless'd with which you see. Ask me what question thou canst possible, And I will answer unpremeditated:285 My courage try by combat, if thou darest, And thou shalt find that I exceed my sex. Resolve on this, thou shalt be fortunate, If thou receive me for thy warlike mate. Act 1, Scene ii
In the play, Joan is a strong warrior, a clever tactician, and a gifted orator, yet her main function in the play is as the antagonist who goes toe to toe against the English warrior, Lord Talbott.
Naturally, since Shakespeare was trying to write for an English audience, Joan is portrayed as the antagonist, not the hero. The English make many snide comments that suggest Joan might not be as virtuous or as righteous as she appears. However, Shakespeare never outright calls Joan a witch or portrays her doing anything other than trying to fight for her country, by any means necessary.
Once Charles is crowned and Joan gets back Orléans for the French, the tide of battle turns against her. In Shakespeare’s version, this is because the English are united around John of Bedford, (King Henry’s uncle and Regent of France), as well as Lord Talbot, the great knight and “Terror of the French”. In Act V, scene iii, Joan calls upon spirits to fight the English:
The regent conquers, and the Frenchmen fly. Now help, ye charming spells and periapts; And ye choice spirits that admonish me And give me signs of future accidents. [Thunder] You speedy helpers, that are substitutes Under the lordly monarch of the north, Appear and aid me in this enterprise. [Enter Fiends] This speedy and quick appearance argues proof Of your accustom'd diligence to me. Now, ye familiar spirits, that are cull'd Out of the powerful regions under earth, Help me this once, that France may get the field. [They walk, and speak not] O, hold me not with silence over-long! Where I was wont to feed you with my blood, I'll lop a member off and give it you In earnest of further benefit, So you do condescend to help me now. [They hang their heads] No hope to have redress? My body shall Pay recompense, if you will grant my suit. [They shake their heads] Cannot my body nor blood-sacrifice Entreat you to your wonted furtherance? Then take my soul, my body, soul and all, Before that England give the French the foil. [They depart] See, they forsake me! Now the time is come That France must vail her lofty-plumed crest And let her head fall into England's lap. My ancient incantations are too weak, And hell too strong for me to buckle with: Now, France, thy glory droopeth to the dust. [Exit]
Joan LaPucelle in the 2010 RSC production of “Henry VI, Part 1
At first glance this passage seems shocking- Shakespeare appears to be accusing the patron saint of France of witchcraft. Even more bizarre, later when Joan is arrested by the English lords, she claims to be pregnant with King Charles’ child! And to confound the audience even further, Joan contradicts her own confession by denying any witchcraft or any relationship with any man:
Joan la Pucelle: First, let me tell you whom you have condemn'd: Not me begotten of a shepherd swain, But issued from the progeny of kings; Virtuous and holy; chosen from above, By inspiration of celestial grace, To work exceeding miracles on earth. I never had to do with wicked spirits: But you, that are polluted with your lusts, Stain'd with the guiltless blood of innocents, Corrupt and tainted with a thousand vices, Because you want the grace that others have, You judge it straight a thing impossible To compass wonders but by help of devils. No, misconceived! Joan of Arc hath been A virgin from her tender infancy, Chaste and immaculate in very thought; Whose maiden blood, thus rigorously effused, Will cry for vengeance at the gates of heaven. Henry VI, Part I, Act V, Scene iv
I get the sense that Shakespeare is trying to make Joan’s character ambiguous- if you are an English patriot, you can see her as a witch, a liar, and a manipulative harlot. If you are French, you see these accusations as filthy lies, and Joan’s “confession,” as merely a desperate attempt to spare her own life, one that tragically backfires.
The Real Joan of Arc
Born: circa 1412 in Domrémy, France
Died: May 30 1431 (executed by burning)
Birth/ Childhood
Joan was born January 6th, 1412 to Isabelle and Jacques D’Arc, the mayor of the town of Domr’emy France. At the time, Domremy was right on the border between the Armeniacs (who supported Charles the Dauphin) and the Burgundians, who supported King Henry V of England as rightful king of all Frence. Because of this, Joan’s home was subject to English raids and she might have been raised to support Charles as her lawful king. In any case, the accounts we have describe her as very pious, intelligent, generous, and a lover of justice.She had no formal education nor any experience on the Battlefield. Yet, by all accounts, Joan was an extremely devout youth, devoted to God, and her lawful king.
Call to Arms
When she was 13, Joan went to pray in her father’s garden and believed that she saw the Archangel Michael, who prophesied that she would be the one to save France. In 1428, Joan approached Robert Baudricourt, Lord of Vaucouleurs. She demanded to join the French army and to bring Charles to Reims to be officially crowned king. Though she was turned away three times, Joan’s faith and courage attracted followers from the surrounding countryside, and Baudricourt eventually agreed to train Joan to fight, and allowed her and her enterage to talk to Charles the Dauphin about joining the troops defending the city of Orléans.
Once he met Joan at his palace in Chinon, the Dauphin agreed to let her take weapons and supplies to the troops who were already laying siege to the French town of Orléans. However, Joan insisted on leading the troops into battle, and quickly became a symbol of French resistance.
The Siege of Orléans
The city of Orléans was a vital town that the English had garrison. For six months, the French had attempted to starve out the English, destroy their defenses, and retake the city.
Joan la Pucelle. Advance our waving colours on the walls; Rescued is Orleans from the English Thus Joan la Pucelle hath perform’d her word.- Henry the Sixth, Part I
Diagram of a castle Diagram of siege equipment
Joan’s Fall From Grace
Henry, by the grace of God, king of France and England, greeting. It is well known how for some time a woman calling herself Jeanne the Maid, putting off the habit and dress of the female sex (which is contrary to divine law, abominable to God, condemned and prohibited by every law), has dressed and armed herself in the state and habit of man, has wrought and occasioned cruel murders, and it is said, to seduce and deceive the simple people, has given them to understand that she was sent from God and that she had knowledge of His divine secrets, with many other dangerous dogmatizations most prejudicial and scandalous to our holy faith. Whilst pursuing these abuses and exercising hostilities against us and our people, she was captured in arms before Compiègne by certain of our loyal subjects and has subsequently been led prisoner towards us. And because she has been reputed, charged and defamed by many people on the subject of superstitions, false dogmas and other crimes of divine treason, we have been most urgently required by our well beloved and loyal counselor the bishop of Beauvais, the ecclesiastical and ordinary judge of the said Jeanne, who was taken and apprehended in the boundaries and limits of his diocese
Letter from King Henry VI to the Bishop of Beauvais (Joan’s captor), January 3rd, 1431
Joan was captured in 1430, when King Henry of England was only 10 years old. Even though now France is united with pride for Joan and her defense of her country, back then there were plenty of factions that actually supported the English, and those French factions captured, and arrested her for heresy during the siege of Compiègne.
The Trial- January 9th, 1431
It has pleased divine Providence that a woman of the name of Jeanne, commonly called The Maid, should be taken and apprehended by famous warriors within the boundaries and limits of our diocese and jurisdiction. The reputation of this woman had already gone forth into many parts: how, wholly forgetful of womanly honesty, and having thrown off the bonds of shame, careless of all the modesty of womankind, she wore with an astonishing and monstrous brazenness, immodest garments belonging to the male sex.
As this excerpt from the trial transcripts demonstrates, Joan’s trial focused much more on her alleged heresy and witchcraft, rather than her defying British rule. In reality, Joan’s arrest and martyrdom was a political sacrifice for the French- they wanted to show political support for their English overlords, without alienating Joan’s supporters. Discrediting Joan by calling her a heretic was a calculated political move, and Joan probably knew it.
Execution
Joan is burned at the stake
Joan was executed by burning on May 30th, 1431, six months before King Henry was formally crowned King of England. After her death, Henry was unable to maintain control of France and his incomplete, combined with a congenital mental illness, is why he later lost
Iconic portrayals:
Trailer for Carl Dryer’s Passion of Joan of Arc (1928)
Mila Jovavich in Luc Besson’s “The Messanger”, 1999
Sources:
Books
You Wouldn’t Want To Be Joan of Arc
Joan of Arc by Josephine Poole
Title Page of Joan of Arc by Josephine Poole, illustrated by Angela Barrett
Why no Coriolanus?? David Oyelowo is playing him at the National Theatre and it’s the one analysis of Shakespeare you don’t have! Please hurry! I’m seeing it on Friday!
User Noittickles, sent to me today
Well, with a request like that, how can I refuse!
Coriolanus is the only Shakespearean story about Republican Rome, which is to say, before Julius Caesar turned Rome into a dictatorship. The play has been called pro-democracy, pro-monarchy, fascist, Marxist, and many other things. In some ways, the play is rather simple and its verse isn’t much fun to read, but the questions it poses, and the way Coriolanus shows the clash between power and common people, makes it fascinating to think about.
The play’s title character is also the most opaque one Shakespeare ever wrote. Some say he is a war hero, undone by the mob. Some say he is a want-to-be dictator who hates the common people and wants to keep power among the military elite. Unlike Hamlet, Macbeth, or any of Shakespeare’s other tragic heroes, we never get a sense of his true intent, or his actual feelings on anything.
To illustrate this, let’s look at two very different interpretations of the same speech. In Act III, Scene iii, the tribunes (representatives of the commons in the Senate), have organized a smear campaign to prevent Coriolanus from becoming Consul, (the highest rank a Roman aristocrat could achieve before Emperor Augustus). Coriolanus is furious at the Tribunes, and vows to leave Rome to take his revenge on the city. Here’s the text of the speech:
Coriolanus. You common cry of curs! whose breath I hate As reek o' the rotten fens, whose loves I prize As the dead carcasses of unburied men That do corrupt my air, I banish you; And here remain with your uncertainty! Let every feeble rumour shake your hearts! Your enemies, with nodding of their plumes, Fan you into despair! Have the power still To banish your defenders; till at length Your ignorance, which finds not till it feels, Making not reservation of yourselves, Still your own foes, deliver you as most Abated captives to some nation That won you without blows! Despising, For you, the city, thus I turn my back: There is a world elsewhere. [Exeunt CORIOLANUS, COMINIUS, MENENIUS, Senators,] and Patricians] Aedile. The people's enemy is gone, is gone! Citizens. Our enemy is banish'd! he is gone! Hoo! hoo!
In the first speech, Tom Huddleston plays Coriolanus as a heroic soldier, disgusted and hurt by the lies of the scheming Tribunes:
Hiddleston chose to play Coriolanus not as a villain but as a frustrated demagogue- someone who wants to lead his people to greatness, whether they like it or not. Whether you approve of his methods, Hiddleston’s Caius Martius does care about the good of Rome. You can almost see the tears in his eyes as he leaves the city he loves, the city he bled for, and that has now betrayed him.
By Contrast, Ralph Fiennes takes a much more authoritarian and cruel route in the film Coriolanus, which Fiennes also directed:
Youtube critic Kyle Kallgren made the excellent case that Fiennes’ Coriolanus is first and foremost, a soldier. You could argue that perhaps Coriolanus has no political ambition whatsoever; he merely wants to keep fighting because war is all he knows. Maybe he purposefully sabotaged himself during his campaign for Consul, because all he wishes to rule is the battlefield:
Kalgren also highlights the “proto fascist” parts of Fiennes’ performance, since Fiennes himself has played Nazis, serial killers, and of course, Lord Voldemort, who is essentially a fascist dictator. Like Merchant of Venice, the Nazi party used Coriolanus as a propaganda tool, claiming that Caius’ fall from grace showed the failure of a weak democracy:
The poet deals with the problem of the people and its leader, he depicts the true nature of the leader in contrast to the aimless masses; he shows a people led in a false manner, a false democracy, whose exponents yield to the wishes of the people for egotistical reasons. Above these weaklings towers the figure of the true hero and leader, Coriolanus, who would like to guide the deceived people to its health in the same way as, in our days, Adolf Hitler would do with our beloved German Fatherland.
Martin Brunkhorst, “Shakespeare’s Coriolanus in Deutscher Bearbeitung. Quoted from Weida
It makes sense that fascists would gravitate towards a play about a seemingly virtuous Roman military leader. After all, the word “fascism” is an Italian word, coined by Benito Mussolini, to evoke the glory days of the Roman Empire- days when Roman society was based on military conquest under a strong leader. What these fascists fail to recognize is that Coriolanus is not a strong leader- he hates politics and is unable to gain any support from the people or from the elites in power. His inability to “play the game” of Roman politics, does make him appealing to some, but on the whole, his career is a disaster.
Some have chosen to interpret the story of Coriolanus as a sort of action-movie wish fulfillment- a man in a lawless society who uses his fists rather than words. Back in the 1990s, Steve Bannon (former advisor to President Donald Trump), wrote a hip-hop musical called: The Thing I Am, which re-interpreted the story of Coriolanus as a police captain who is trying to clean up downtown LA, which is embroiled in gang warfare. I find this interpretation paper-thin and not at all conducive to the spirit of the original play. It also has very racist and paternalistic undertones. You can read my review of it here:
Shakespeare refuses to be prescriptive on political or social issues. He tries to represent all sides of an issue and let the audience decide. With the rise of neo-fascist movements, sectarian violence, and the persistent questions surrounding police and military forces, Coriolanus is more relevant than ever. I haven’t seen this production at the National Theater, but I hope it calls attention to the various angles and points of view of the play- Coriolanus the war hero, Coriolanus the traitor, Coriolanus the soldier, Coriolanus the would-be-dictator. David Oyelowo is a fantastic Shakespearean actor, so I’m sure he can bring a great deal of complexity and nuance to this complicated man.
What I find interesting is that the trailer chooses to use this speech, when Coriolanus has defected to Rome’s enemies, the Volskies. He seems sorrowful, desperate, and afraid of what the Volskies will do to him, now that he is in their camp. One line that Oyelowo delivered exceptionally well was the line “Only the name remains.” I haven’t seen the whole play, but it seems THIS Coriolanus is concerned with the glory of his name living after him. The final question this play asks is, for such a complicated man, how will Coriolanus be remembered?
Well, there you go, Stopittickles! Hope you enjoyed this overview of the play Coriolanus. If you like this review, you might like to sign up for my online class on Julius Caesar via outschool.com:
Parent Description- A fully online, fully interactive course into Shakespeare’s histories taught by a professional text coach and actor.
Students- Uncover the scandalous and gory history behind Shakespeare’s most action-packed plays! Shakespeare’s histories have inspired such works as “Empire,” “Game of Thrones,” “Hamilton” and even the “Star Wars” trilogy. This class will unlock for you why these stories of power and betrayal have been so popular for 400 years.
Format:
0. The class will have a Nearpod with slides, activities, and links to my other resources. The class will be a combination of slides, activities, and videos. Each class will have
Weekly Discussion questions via Google Forms such as: “What do you know about Shakespeare the man?” or, “Are Shakespeare plays still relevant today?”
Video Analysis- Every week I’ll discuss a different play with a short video.
I’ll provide some context, explaining what is happening in the play durin the speech, and any relevant historical context.
We’ll watch a recording and the students can write their impressions on what they like and don’t like.
Immersive activities such as:
– Shakespeare arts and crafts and recipes such as making costumes and props.
– My online Shakespeare board game.
Virtual tours of the Tower Of London,
Weekly Web Quests like “find a Shakespeare quote that you use in normal speech,” “find a movie or character that’s based on Shakespeare,” or “Draw a picture of a Shakespearean character (stick figures are acceptable).
6 Week Course
Week 1 – Why Hamilton is Like A Shakespeare History Play Hamilton and Shakespearean History We’ll discuss what makes a history play a history play, why they were so popular in Shakespeare’s day, and draw parallels between Shakespeare and the Broadway Musical “Hamilton.”
What is a history play?
Song quest: Watch the Horrible histories king song
Worksheet- which Shakespearean character reminds you most of Hamilton?
What would you call the tone of this speech? Patriotic? Mournful? Excited? Bitter?
The deposition Scene (video- 3 minutes)
The danger of this scene:
Though Queen Elizabeth I is now almost universally beloved, she wasn’t always in Shakespeare’s time. By 1601, she was 68 years old and had no male heir. Her government had also failed to put down a rebellion in Ireland. Some people in her government were getting restless.
Robert Devereaux, Earl of Essex was one of those restless nobles. He’d been one of the Queen’s favorites, but after failing to crush the rebellion in Ireland, his relationship with her sourered. He then plotted to rebel against the Queen, and take the throne for himself.
To do that though, Essex would need to get people on his side, so he recruited Shakespeare! One of Essex’s servants paid Shakespeare’s companies to perform a scene from Shakespeare’s Richard II; the scene where a handsome and charismatic nobleman convinces the king to willingly give up his power.
This scene was so dangerous that when the play was published, it was taken out by Elizabeth’s censors.
Playing Richard video: Fiona Shaw Questions What does making Richard female emphasize for an audience? What point does Shaw’s performance say about women in power?
Week 3 Henry V week
Tom Hiddleston as Henry V
Basic plot- Young king fights a war and conquers France proving himself to the world.
Olivier vs. Branaugh
-Concept- what if the play was a Hockey movie?
Henry is like the coach or team captain who gives inspirational speeches
The underdogs win
The snooty bad guys lose
How this translates to staging fights/ directing the characters (website/ youtube interviews)
Activity= write a trailer or design a poster for Henry with a cool tag line.
Week 4- The Wars of the Roses-
Summary of the three Henry VI plays
Wars of the Roses Horrible Histories
Web quest- research one major character from the 3H6 ASC website:
Richard of Gloucester
Henry VI
Margaret of Anjou
Richard of York
Medieval warfare
Watch one of the Weapons that Made Brittain videos and answer 5 questions.
The battles of the Wars of the roses
Costumes
Week 5- Richard III- The rise of the corrupt king
Close reading- “Now Is the Winter of Our Discontent”
Slides on Richard’s plot.
Richard and Machiavelli
Richard and Emperor Palpatine
Richard and Modern Leaders
Richard vs. the Amir of Gloucester
Propaganda activity- make a campaign slogan/ poster for Richard.
Title Card- “The Violent Rhetoric Of Julius Caesar”Title for my Outschool class on Codes and Ciphers, inspired by the Disney show “Gravity Falls.”Digital business card for my online classes with a QR code if you want to know moreTitle art for my Outschool course on Shakespeare’s comediesCover art for my Outschool class: “Shakespeare- the Lost Play”Title of my Outschool murder mystery gameTitle image for my online course on “Romeo and Juliet.”Title card for my Outchool Intro To Shakespeare cs.Title art for my Outschool course on Shakespeare’s comediesTitle for my Outschool class in swords and Stage Combat.
Great online classes in Shakespeare and science are available for students all this month at Outschool.com.
From now until June 1st, you can get a $20 discount with referral code PAULHT20. Share the joy with other curious minds in the family too! Spread the word and let’s ignite the passion for learning together!
Class Descriptions
Live Classes
For these classes you meet with me live over Zoom:
Introduction to Shakespeare- Tuesdays 9-9:30AM (EST)
This is my 30 minute short and sweet intro to Shakespeare’s life, his plays, and why his work still matters to us today!
Intro To STage Combat (With SwordS)- Tuesdays 9:30-10AM (EST)-
Like the Intro to Shakespeare class above, this is an intro to the basic footwork, attacks, and defensive parries of swordplays for someone just begeinning to learn about swords.
Title image for my online course on “Romeo and Juliet.”
An Immersive Guide To “Romeo and Juliet- Tuesdays from 10-11AM (EST)
This multi-week course delves into the plot, characters and themes of “Romeo and Juliet,” while also providing interactive activities, virtual tours, and webquests.
Shakespeare’s History Plays- SaturdAYs 8:30 AM IST
This is a new course I’m working on to cover all of Shakespeare’s History plays including Henry V, Richard II, and Richard III. More info as it becomes available.
Asynchronous Classes
These classes are Flex Schedule, which means the teacher prepares the activities in advance and allows you to do them at your own pace without direct consultation.
A flexible schedule class that teaches kids the plot and characters of “Romeo and Juliet,” in the context of a detective story where you solve the mystery of the young lovers’ deaths.
Did you know that Star Wars is based on the ideas and writings of William Shakespeare? This class will teach you about writing and characters though games, interactive activities and dramatic readings of both Star Wars and Shakespeare!
Concept: To explore the plot, characters, and themes of Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar while also gaining an insight into Ancient Roman history and culture.
Student Description: Delve into the passionate speeches of Brutus and Antony in Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar, which led a whole country to revolution.
Parent Description Using self-paced online activities, and a helpful handout, your child(ren) will analyze the rhetoric and persuasive power in two speeches from Shakespeare’s “Julius Caesar.” The course will also cover the culture of Ancient Rome, and the circumstances that led to Julius Caesar’s assasination, which inadvertently led to the birth of the Roman Empire.
Course Organizaiton (the class is divided into 4 parts that students can complete at their own pace over a week-long period
Each lesson will have:
“That Is the Question” (Essential Question)
Lesson Objectives
Set the Scene (Background and context)- 1-3 slides
The Players (biography) 1-3 slides
Go Deeper (Webquest)
Explore military life and the lives of women in Rome using my blog and other websites as a guide.
Post 3 things you learned to the Outschool page or send a photo of your completed handout.
Words, Words Words (Vocabulary, famous lines)
A Taste of Your Quality (Independant Project)
Show us your mettle (Test)
So each class should be 14-15 slides long.
Outline
Class I- Background on Caesar and Roman Culture
That is the Question:
Why did Brutus feel Julius Caesar had to die?
What was the aftermath?
Can one person’s speech effect an entire nation?
Lesson Objectives
To provide historical and political context to explain why Julius Caesar was assassinated, and how his death inadvertantly created the Roman Empire.
To explain the Rhetorical Triangle, the building blocks of persuasive speech.
To go through the story of Julius Caesar focusing on the effect of the speeches.
To study the famous “Friends, Romans Countrymen” speech.
To contrast this speech with some more recent political speeches and you think critically about:
Brutus- Podcast episode. I posit in this episode that Brutus is
Words, Words, Words-
Traitor
Republic
Dictator
Revolution
Ethos
Pathos
Logos
Rhetoric
Colossus
Aeneus
A Taste Of Your Quality:
(Independent work): We’ll examine a painting of Brutus’ ancestor Lucius and learn why Brutus values Rome more than even family.
Show Us Your Mettle:
Quizzes on Brutus
Class 3- Antony and Brutus’ Dueling Speeches
(c) Hartlepool Museums and Heritage Service; Supplied by The Public Catalogue Foundation
That Is the Question
After Caesar’s Death, his friend Marc Antony held a funeral for him where he gives the famous “Friends, Romans, Countrymen” speech. How did Antony’s speech affect the crowd?
Brutus has a speech where he explains why he killed Caesar. What does he say, and how effectively does he say it?
Antony was secretly plotting to take power for himself, and get Brutus and Cassius killed. How did he do it?
Do speeches have the power to change a nation?
Learning Objectives
To explain the Rhetorical Triangle, the building blocks of persuasive speech.
To study the famous “Friends, Romans Countrymen” speech, as well
To look at these speeches and get you to think critically about:
We’ll talk about the consequences of violent revolutions and how Julius Caesar has inspired some of the greatest speeches in political history.
-Patrick Henry
– Gettysburg Address
– Mean Girls
That Is the Question
How have people interpreted the play “Julius Caesar” in America?
Does this play promote violence?
What kind of violent speech do we deal with in politics today?
Learning Objectives
To show the link between American History and Julius Caesar
To address the controversy and the misconception that the play promotes violent assassination.
To end on a cautionary note people must think critically about what they hear in politics and not make rash decisions based on appeals to fear.
Setting the Scene- US History
America was founded using the principles of republican government that Ancient Rome used- with a senate, and a series of checks and balances to ensure no one has too much power.
America was founded in a violent revolution, and some of our country’s early leaders used Brutus as an inspiration- to overcome a tyrannical king.
In later years, however, some people have forgotten what happened to Brutus
Today, we are often bombarded with speech that encourages fear and anger and we must think critically when we hear such speech in whatever forum- Roman, or Reddit.
The Players (use my JC lecture?)
Patrick Henry
Abraham Lincoln
John Wilkes Booth
Donald Trump
Go Deeper
-Watch the Caesar Video
– How does the play promote nonviolence?
– How did Brutus’ assassination fail to save the Roman Republic?
The Shakespearean Student 