Review: Kentucky Shakespeare’s “Two Gentlemen Of Verona”

In Case You Haven’t Heard

Two Gentlemen Of Verona is probably Shakespeare’s first comedy, maybe even his first play. A lot of the plot devices and themes Shakespeare explores in later plays were first set down in Two Gentlemen.

The Plot

Two Gentlemen Of Verona is about two best friends, Valentine and Proteus, who start out as young men yearning for adventure and to seek their fortune in Milan. As you might have guessed from his name, Valentine finds love instead of fortune, and so does his friend Proteus. What makes the play unique is that Proteus falls in love with Valentine’s betrothed Silvia, forsaking his faithful sweetheart Julia. The two virtuous girls support each other and fight to stop Proteus from sabotaging their relationships. In the end though, Valentine forgives Proteus and Valentine takes him back, which makes the play a little controversial for modern audiences.

The Concept

What happens in Milan, stays in Milan! Shakespeare’s gleefully silly comedy is set in 1940’s Las Vegas, where love and friendship are put to the test. A charming adventure navigating a love triangle, betrayal, disguises, an escape into the forest, and a dog. -Quoted from the official program.

The play is set in 1940s Las Vegas, which works well with the theme of young, impressionable men trying to make their fortunes in a place where luck can change in an instant. Proteus goes from a lover and loyal friend to a liar and traitor. Meanwhile, Valentine’s luck changes from a favored gentleman at court, to a banished vagabond.

The performances had the air of a 1940s classic comedy, with a lot of stylized slapstick and over-the top characters. It echoes the work of Laurel and Hardy or Abbot and Costello, which I feel was a wise choice- even if the audience couldn’t understand a word of the dialogue, they could still be entertained by the actors’ over-the top comedy.

Free Shakespeare In the Park

The set of “Two Gentlemen Of Verona”

This was my first KY Shakespeare production, and I enjoyed the overall vibe a lot. According to kyShakespeare.com, the company is enjoying its 66th year of being the longest running, non-ticketed Shakespeare festival in the United States. The company prides itself as being accessible, inclusive, anti-racist, and generally committed to welcoming all people to enjoy their shows. From what I saw from my seat on a balmy day in Olmstead Park, Kentucky Shakespeare is doing a great job accomplishing its goals. I saw people from many different walks of life come by, laugh at the jokes, clap and cheer, and have a good time.

The Cast

The cast has a great grasp of Shakespeare’s language and comic timing. Like I said before, the cast performed as if they were in a 1940s classic comedy, which helps sells some of the absurd moments in the play. That said, across the board, the actors also knew how to deliver the serious moments of the play with grace and pathos.

Crystian Wiltshire (Proteus)

As you read earlier, Proteus’ character commits some very questionable actions- betraying his friend and forsaking his girlfriend for no good reason. In order to make the audience feel even a tiny amount of sympathy for him, would require an actor with charm, and a great sense of humor. Fortunately, Chrystian Wiltshire brings both of these qualities, as well as a great deal of skill. His Proteus is basically a young, naive fool, who never considers the long term consequences of his actions. One gets the impression that by the end of the play, he will learn his lesson and become a better man. Still, I heard a few people booing when Valentine forgave him at the end of the play. It’s a testament to Mr Wiltshire’s performance that he inspired such an emotional response from the audience.

Justin Jackson (Valentine) Obviously, any production of Two Gentlemen depends upon the actors playing the title characters. The play’s central tension is Proteus changing from a lover to a liar and Valentine from a libertine to a lover. Fortunately, Mr Jackson is a great foil for Mr Wiltshire as Proteus. He excellently portrays the change of Valentines heart. At the beginning of the play he is charming and devil-may-care. If you haven’t read the play before, you might expect that Valentine might be the real liar and cheat from the way he teases Proteus about his lovesick behavior. But, once he meets Silvia, Valentine is utterly sincere and his smarmy looks are replaced by a rock solid earnestness. Jackson expertly conveys this startling metamorphosis with his powerful voice, imposing height, and dashing good looks. I wish I could see him in a tragic role like Hamlet or Brutus, but with his masterful portrayal of Valentine, I’m sure he’ll have many more memorable performances in the future.

Kate Drury (Julia) I hope I have established by now that the main idea Shakespeare conveys in this play is that people transform when they fall in love, and neither the exterior nor interior man (or woman), resembles who they were. This is especially true with Julia, who starts out as a simpering, childish girl who tears up Proteus’s love letter to prove that she is not in love, but then agonizes over her cruel destruction of the note. This speech could seem cloyingly sweet or annoying in the wrong hands, but Miss Drury pulls it off to great effect.

Even more impressive is the transformation Julia undergoes in Act 2, where she disguises herself as a man and faces many dangers to find and confront Proteus. She even has the heart to befriend Silvia, the woman Proteus forsakes her for. The childish Julia from Act I might not understand that Proteus is unfaithful, not the virtuous Silvia, but Kate effortlessly shows Julia’s wisdom to see that Silvia never entices Proteus, and scolds his behavior on behalf of Julia herself. It’s rare to see an Elizabethan playwright portray a female friendship that is mature and genuine, but Shakespeare manages to do so, and the actresses mirror this relationship flawlessly.

Tilly as Crabbe the Dog

For most people in the audience, the true star of the show was Tilly as Crabbe the dog. When my kids and I took our seats, my son’s immediate question was “When is the dog coming?” To be fair, Tilly is very cute and never once breaks character.

My Reaction

I tried my best to separate my feelings about Two Gentlemen Of Verona from the production. As I mentioned earlier, as Shakespeare’s first comedy, many of his more famous works are actually derived from this one. For instance, we have an Italian hero who visits his beloved by night, whose love is denied and he is banished from Verona, (sound familiar?) We also have a heroine who disguises herself as a boy, (a device which Shakespeare employs at least six times), a comic servant, a maid, pirates, a foppish suitor, and a bit where the heroine secretly obtains her beloved’s ring. As a hardcore Shakespeare fan, seeing these repeated devices and characters was a little tedious after recognizing them from other plays. I also felt that the dialogue should have been edited a little bit more- the play was about 2 1/2 hours which I felt was a little too long. That said, the skill of the actors and the creative use of the setting helped make Two Gentlemen Of Verona an enjoyable experience for all.

In conclusion, I can see why people like this play and I too enjoy it, despite its questionable subtext.

If you like this analysis, you might be interested in signing up for my Outschool Course on Shakespeare’s Comedies. Link down below. Share this class with a friend and you will get $20 USD off!
You’ll also get $20 USD when you sign up with your link and take their first class!

https://outschool.com/classes/shakespeares-comic-plays-868BR5hg?sectionUid=420e2feb-050f-456b-8d06-6510f6b9ad2c&usid=MaRDyJ13&signup=true&utm_campaign=share_activity_link

Review – ‘William Shakespeare’s Star Wars: The Mandalorian of Nevarro’

Happy May 4th Everyone!

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.

https://www.starwarsnewsnet.com/2026/04/review-william-shakespeares-star-wars-the-mandalorian-of-nevarro-reimagines-mando-in-a-worthy-retelling-of-the-series.html

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.

May the Forth Be With Thee!

Mando

The Fashion Is the Fashion: Antony and Cleopatra

Part I: Famous Cleopatras

Elizabethan Taylor

Elizabeth Taylor in her iconic portrayal in the film “Caesar and Cleopatra”

Part II: The Real Cleopatra

  1. Actually Greek, but assimilated into Egyptian Society
  2. Dressed as the Egyptian Goddess Isis (allegedly)
  3. Spoke egyptian
  4. Hosted elaborate parties where her dress conveyed the wealth of Egypt
  5. Beauty routine.

Part II DIY antony and Cleopatra

Roman Helmet/ Sword

Jewelry

Dress

Crown

Hair

Makeup

Part III Staging antony and cleopatra

Egyptian Antony

Roman Anthony

Color blind casting

Works Cited:

https://theconversation.com/cleopatras-skin-colour-didnt-matter-in-ancient-egypt-her-strategic-role-in-world-history-did-205240

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/rehabilitating-cleopatra-70613486/

Shakespeare’s Awesome Heroines: Joan of Arc

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

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 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

  1. You Wouldn’t Want To Be Joan of Arc
  1. Joan of Arc by Josephine Poole
Title Page of Joan of Arc by Josephine Poole, illustrated by Angela Barrett

Medieval Manuscripts: The Trial of Joan of Arc:

https://origin.web.fordham.edu/Halsall/basis/joanofarc-trial.asp

https://dailygalaxy.com/2025/09/shakespeare-a-rediscovered-manuscript-flips-the-familys-legacy-on-its-head-more-than-400-years-after-it-was-written/

Intro to Coriolanus


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:

Coriolanus Today

https://www.nationaltheatre.org.uk/productions/coriolanus/

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:

Click here to sign up and get a $5 discount: https://outschool.com/teachers/The-Shakespearean-Student

Review: Kenneth Branaugh’s As You Like It

The Concept

According to Branaugh, the idea behind the film was to emphasize beautiful things like tranquility and love, but preserve and heighten the danger of being hunted by a powerful warlord like the Duke

Interview with the director and cast at the Barbican

The Plot Of the Play

Historical Context

Branaugh set the film in 19th century Japan, at a time when English people came to Japan for the first time, and created small English communities in the country. I’ll discuss later that I have very conflicting feelings with this choice, but I will give Branaugh this- it does highlight the fish out of water journey that Rosalind and the other characters go through leaving their homes at court, and becoming enamored with a new country.

The Cast

The cast is full of veteran Shakespeareans and gifted Hollywood stars. Bryce Dallas Howard is charming as Rosalind, and has good chemistry with RSC actor David Oyelowo. I also enjoyed Brian Blessed’s dual role as Duke Senior and Duke Frederick. Kevin Klein is very sincere as Jaques but I wish he had a bit more fun with the over exaggerated melancholy that Jaques puts on. The overall effect of the performances is a sentimental, charming, beautiful, witty group of people who are having a fun time.

My Reaction

The cast is great, the cinematography is stunning, and the music is charming. Overall, Branaugh has done a great job of bringing the spirit of the play alive- that of a sweet, pastoral comedy about love, unrestrained by wealth or status. What I worry about though, is that Branaugh might inadvertently be celebrating colonialism. Yes, Japan is a beautiful country with a  highly sophisticated and rich culture, so it makes sense that English people would be drawn to it. That does not justify the cruel way the English and Americans colonized parts of Japan, made the people mine for gold, and forced them to trade with the west. I worry that, like The Mikado, Branaugh celebrates Japan in a way that makes it seem like westerners were justified in taking so much away from it. I wish the plot had more of a “look but don’t touch” attitude to Japanese culture.

I also question the decision to cast barely any Asian actors. Given the story Branaugh wants to tell, it makes sense to cast non-asian actors as The Duke, Rosalind, Celia, and even Orlando, since they come to the forest from an English-style court. But the roles of Corin, Silvius, Audry, Phoebe, and even Old Adam are people who are supposed to be familiar with the country, meaning it would make perfect sense to cast Asian actors in these roles. Frankly, there are very few well known Asian actors in Hollywood and I would love to give some of them a chance to shine, especially since Shakespeare has long been a way for actors of all cultures and races to show their skills.

In conclusion, I can see why people like this movie and I too enjoy it, despite its questionable subtext. I don’t want to take away anyone’s enjoyment of the film, just to remind people not to be too seduced by the historical practice of taking something “As You Like It”

If you like this analysis, you might be interested in signing up for my Outschool Course on Shakespeare’s Comedies. Link down below. Share this class with a friend and you will get $20 USD off!
You’ll also get $20 USD when you sign up with your link and take their first class!

https://outschool.com/classes/shakespeares-comic-plays-868BR5hg?sectionUid=420e2feb-050f-456b-8d06-6510f6b9ad2c&usid=MaRDyJ13&signup=true&utm_campaign=share_activity_link

New Course: Shakespeare’s Histories

Shakespeare’s History Class

Course trailer

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 

  1. Weekly Discussion questions via Google Forms such as: “What do you know about Shakespeare the man?” or, “Are Shakespeare plays still relevant today?”
  2. Video Analysis- Every week I’ll discuss a different play with a short video.
    1. I’ll provide some context, explaining what is happening in the play durin the speech, and any relevant historical context.
    2. We’ll watch a recording and the students can write their impressions on what they like and don’t like.
  3. Immersive activities such as:
    1. – Shakespeare arts and crafts and recipes such as making costumes and props.
    2. – My online Shakespeare board game.
    3. Virtual tours of the Tower Of London,
  4. 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.”

  1. What is a history play?
  2. Song quest: Watch the Horrible histories king song
  3. Worksheet- which Shakespearean character reminds you most of Hamilton?
  4. Video- the 10 Duel commandments of Shakespeare

Week 2- Richard II

  1. The history of Richard Shakespeare’s Richard II | Animated short
  2. Watch the presentation and fill in the blanks of the story: Richard the Second Intro Presentation
  3. Web quest- go online and write down three things about the Wilton Diptych
    1. Wilton Diptych https://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/english-or-french-the-wilton-diptych
      1. Open ended question- if you were Richard, how would you feel about your role as king?
  4. John of Gaunt’s speech
    1. Watch Patrick Stewart reading this: Shakespeare: “This scepter’d isle”
    2. Now see John McInerny performing it in context
      1. What images were the most striking?
      2. Did you feel more sorry for Gaunt, or England?
      3. What would you call the tone of this speech? Patriotic? Mournful? Excited? Bitter? 
  5. The deposition Scene (video- 3 minutes)
    1. The danger of this scene:
      1. 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.
      2. 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.
      3. 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. 
      4. This scene was so dangerous that when the play was published, it was taken out by Elizabeth’s censors.
      5. Quotes from Richard II
        1. https://shakespearedocumented.folger.edu/resource/document/examination-augustine-phillips#:~:text=In%20his%20examination%20on%20February,fellows%20proposed%20an%20alternative%20play%2C  
        2. https://www.historic-uk.com/HistoryUK/HistoryofEngland/Shakespeare-Richard-II-Rebellion/ 
        3. https://www.elizabethi.org/contents/rebellions/essex/ 
  6. 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

  1. Basic plot- Young king fights a war and conquers France proving himself to the world.
  2. Olivier vs. Branaugh

-Concept- what if the play was a Hockey movie?

  1. Henry is like the coach or team captain who gives inspirational speeches
  2. The underdogs win
  3. The snooty bad guys lose
  • How this translates to staging fights/ directing the characters (website/ youtube interviews)
  1. Activity= write a trailer or design a poster for Henry with a cool tag line.

Week 4- The Wars of the Roses-

  1. Summary of the three Henry VI plays
    1. Wars of the Roses Horrible Histories
    2. Web quest- research one major character from the 3H6 ASC website:
      1. Richard of Gloucester
      2. Henry VI
      3. Margaret of Anjou
      4. Richard of York
  2. Medieval warfare
    1. Watch one of the Weapons that Made Brittain videos and answer 5 questions.
    2. The battles of the Wars of the roses
  3. Costumes

Week 5- Richard III- The rise of the corrupt king

  1. Close reading- “Now Is the Winter of Our Discontent”
  2. Slides on Richard’s plot.
  3. Richard and Machiavelli
  4. Richard and Emperor Palpatine
  5. Richard and Modern Leaders
  6. Richard vs. the Amir of Gloucester
  7. Propaganda activity- make a campaign slogan/ poster for Richard.

Week 6 History Board Game/ Final Project