These videos show images of both a stage representation of Shakepeare's play (in which the wardrobe and characterization show resemblance to the historical period the author depicted in his work) and a clip of the Royal Shakespeare Company's production from 1976. Curiously enough, this adaptation was also a musical.
Notice that in the second video the setting seems to have shifted from a high class Renassaince family to a modern middle class group of individuals. However, elements of farce such as exaggeration and physical comedy are still there.
">
">
Monday 15 November 2010
''The Battle of Maldon'' and ''The Canterbury Tales'' in Old/Middle English
The Medium
He loves religion and the people
that redeem their sins;
his little putrid fellow always bring news
about the next victim under fire.
He follows the Lord rules,
but he does whatever he wants;
he is the protector of his people,
saints belogings and bones.
His good will always is rewarded
with his big wallet,
and his innocence and honesty
can be clearly show in the soul and body.
POSTED BY BRIAN PAEZ
Canterbury-Riddles
1.
A well dressed man going in pilgrimage to Canterbury is accompanied by his tedious talk about his increase of capital and the need of sea-police here and there. He is the expert of experts at dabbling in exchanges, as in loans, bargains, and negotiation. An excellent fellow, but neither I nor you would never know his name.
2.
A thin gentleman, riding a horse thinner than him, carries a sober stare with him to Canterbury. An unworldly air surrounds him, he is grateful to those who helped him and so he prays for them with devotion and truth, he never speaks a word more than is need, he is so discreet, and as willingly as he learned he would then teach.
3.
A man poor and rich at the same time, he was of good renown, going to Canterbury together with his brother. A noble example he gave to his sheep—always thinking to himself that if gold rust, what will then iron do? He was a shepherd and no mercenary, never contemptuous, disdainful, never too proud or fine, he was a business man—he tried his best to gain souls for Heaven working on earth, not looking for pomp and glory, just for his Savior up above.
4.
Hot and lecherous, face on fire, no ointment, no cream would clean his disgusting look. He would make children run as fast as he would drink bottles of wine and shout and jabber like a madman, not in English no no no but in latin oh yes! he would do it at the best style of a parrot talking hollow empty words as he ate his garlic and his onions and his leeks as if he had no pimples on his cheeks.
5.
This noble man of the peasant class went steadily doing his job and loving God with all his heart; always loving his fellows just as himself. To Canterbury, he took with him his humbleness, his love of Christ, and his benevolence.
A well dressed man going in pilgrimage to Canterbury is accompanied by his tedious talk about his increase of capital and the need of sea-police here and there. He is the expert of experts at dabbling in exchanges, as in loans, bargains, and negotiation. An excellent fellow, but neither I nor you would never know his name.
2.
A thin gentleman, riding a horse thinner than him, carries a sober stare with him to Canterbury. An unworldly air surrounds him, he is grateful to those who helped him and so he prays for them with devotion and truth, he never speaks a word more than is need, he is so discreet, and as willingly as he learned he would then teach.
3.
A man poor and rich at the same time, he was of good renown, going to Canterbury together with his brother. A noble example he gave to his sheep—always thinking to himself that if gold rust, what will then iron do? He was a shepherd and no mercenary, never contemptuous, disdainful, never too proud or fine, he was a business man—he tried his best to gain souls for Heaven working on earth, not looking for pomp and glory, just for his Savior up above.
4.
Hot and lecherous, face on fire, no ointment, no cream would clean his disgusting look. He would make children run as fast as he would drink bottles of wine and shout and jabber like a madman, not in English no no no but in latin oh yes! he would do it at the best style of a parrot talking hollow empty words as he ate his garlic and his onions and his leeks as if he had no pimples on his cheeks.
5.
This noble man of the peasant class went steadily doing his job and loving God with all his heart; always loving his fellows just as himself. To Canterbury, he took with him his humbleness, his love of Christ, and his benevolence.
The Battle of Maldon
NARDIS TORRES
An Approach Given Where the Battle of Maldon Took Place
An Approach Given Where the Battle of Maldon Took Place
The ancient causeway linking Northey Island to the south bank of the Blackwater estuary just east of Maldon is considered by many to be the most likely site of the Battle of Maldon. This was fought on August 10th or 11th 991 between an English army led by the veteran ealdorman Byrhtnoth and a professional ship-borne army of Danes.
View across to Northey Island from the south bank of the Blackwater at low tide with the causeway uncovered (author's photograph, August 1991).
The entry for the year 991 in the a manuscript of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle seems to say after a raid on Ipswich the Danes were led at Maldon by the famous Norwegian king Olaf Tryggvason, but this entry has almost certainly been confused with the events of 994. It seems more probable that the Danes at Maldon were led by their own king, Sweyn Forkbeard, son of King Harald Bluetooth of Denmark (builder of the Danish ring-fortresses, such as Trelleborg on Sjalland, and of the royal centre at Jelling in Jutland).
The Battle of Maldon took place on August 10th, 991, near to Maldon beside the River Blackwater in Essex, England, during the reign of Ethelred the Unready. The Anglo-Saxons, led by Byrhtnoth, fought against a Viking invasion. The battle ended with the Anglo-Saxon’s defeat.
Sunday 14 November 2010
The Franklin
He was a traveling companion to the lawyer. He is wealthy, but of noble birth. He enjoys luxurious living. The Franklin is a connoisseur of food and wine. He depicts gluttony. The narrator dislikes him because he wastes resources.
The Doctor
He is not a religious figure; indeed, he rarely read the Bible. He practices his treatments on people. During this time the balance of the “humorous” in the body was thought to be the key to health and disease. Besides, the narrator suggests that the doctor obtains economical revenues by prescribing medicines to the patients, since it was common during those times for doctors and druggists to have a moneymaking alliance.
He was a traveling companion to the lawyer. He is wealthy, but of noble birth. He enjoys luxurious living. The Franklin is a connoisseur of food and wine. He depicts gluttony. The narrator dislikes him because he wastes resources.
The Doctor
He is not a religious figure; indeed, he rarely read the Bible. He practices his treatments on people. During this time the balance of the “humorous” in the body was thought to be the key to health and disease. Besides, the narrator suggests that the doctor obtains economical revenues by prescribing medicines to the patients, since it was common during those times for doctors and druggists to have a moneymaking alliance.
The Wife of the Bath 
She is an excellent seamstress and weaver. She has been has been in different pilgrimages to Jerusalem and other parts of Europe. Chaucer likes this character because she is honest. Unlike the other religious figures in the pilgrimage, she goes the Canterbury Cathedral faithfully to clean her sins. She has had five husbands; all of her marriages were legitimate and recognized by the church. The wife of the Bath´s gap-teeth suggests that she knows very well the art of love.
She is an excellent seamstress and weaver. She has been has been in different pilgrimages to Jerusalem and other parts of Europe. Chaucer likes this character because she is honest. Unlike the other religious figures in the pilgrimage, she goes the Canterbury Cathedral faithfully to clean her sins. She has had five husbands; all of her marriages were legitimate and recognized by the church. The wife of the Bath´s gap-teeth suggests that she knows very well the art of love.
Canterbury TalesThe Yeoman
The yeoman is the servant who accompanies the Knight and the Squire. He resembles Robin Hood in his attire; he carries a green coat and hood. His weapons include bow, arrows and a dirk. Chaucer emphasizes the yeoman´s ability with his weapons. Furthermore, the narrator suggests that the yeoman hides in the forest to attack his victims. Ironically, he carries a metal of St. Christopher, which is supposed to protect the travelers on their journey. In this specific case, the metal is protecting the criminal instead of the travelers.
The yeoman is the servant who accompanies the Knight and the Squire. He resembles Robin Hood in his attire; he carries a green coat and hood. His weapons include bow, arrows and a dirk. Chaucer emphasizes the yeoman´s ability with his weapons. Furthermore, the narrator suggests that the yeoman hides in the forest to attack his victims. Ironically, he carries a metal of St. Christopher, which is supposed to protect the travelers on their journey. In this specific case, the metal is protecting the criminal instead of the travelers.
The Prioress The prioress is the first religious figure mentioned in the text. Her description is rather entertaining. She has no vocation. She sings poorly and she speaks French with an English accent. Chaucer´s irony is emphasized with the description of her charitable attitude and good manners. The narrator exemplifies her charitable and tender feelings with her exaggerated reaction towards the trapped mouse. The prioress tries to be courtly with her manners and posture. Indeed, she seems to be more worried about her manners in the table than helping other people, as it is expected from a nun. She feeds them with roasted flesh, milk and white bread. Besides, this nun is pretentious with jewelry. Chaucer criticizes the religious character that care more about material and superficial matters than helping other people.
The Friar
The friar depicts the corruption of the religious institutions in the medieval society. Unlike monks that had to follow their vows in the monastery, friars could beg for alms within a limited district. The friar abused from his position; he obtained sexual favors from young women in order to arrange a marriage for them. The depravity of the Friar is reinforced when the narrator describes him with white neck and affected slip, which were common symbols for depravity. Besides, Chaucer states that there is no better man at his profession than the friar. He is able to get money from people at any circumstance; for instance, he even gets money from a widow without any pity. The friar absolved people from their sins in exchange to material goods. Furthermore, the friar´s vocation as a religious person is constantly criticized by the narrator since he spends more time in the taverns and inns than with the lepers and beggars.
The LawyerThe narrator depicts the corruption of the lawyer when dealing with properties. Chaucer criticizes landed class lawyers during the medieval times, who were able to break old inherited land titles for their own benefit. As well, the lawyer as portrayed as a show-off since he pretended to know every judgment and case since “King William´s time.” However, this is exaggerated since according to scholars there are no records available starting from that time.
Saturday 13 November 2010
Renaissance Women’s Frustration: Psychological Struggles in The Comedy of Errors by William Shakespeare (Part II)
In addition to the social stratification of the Renaissance society, the role of the female frustration is also depicted in Shakespearean works.
During those years, most women were supposed to attain a good social and economic status; consequently, they had to marry a very wealthy man in order to do so. Nonetheless, because of this social request, the majority of women lived frustrated no matter what their personal condition was. These female frustrations are clearly exemplified by Adriana, who is the wife of Antipholus of Ephesus, and her sister Luciana, in the Comedy of Errors.
In one hand, in the case of Adriana, the psychological weight of being married leads to her feeling of isolation. She even asks “why should their [men’s] liberty than ours [women’s] be more?” (2.1.10), and her sister Luciana replies “because their business still lies out o’door” (2.1.11). Adriana manifests a great discomfort for being confined to the house keeping alone due to her prohibition of getting involved into her husband’s business. In fact, it is her lack of knowledge about Antipholus’ affairs what surprises her at the news that he is arrested because he owes money to somebody. Adriana’s reproachful tone concerning this issue is noteworthy when she says: “Thus he unknown to me should be in debt” (4. 2.51). Women openly expressed their unconformity with the treatment they received throughout the Renaissance time: control. The same action England performed towards the Irish people at that time in their fight for power and money.
On the other hand, Luciana suffers the judgment of the Renaissance society for she is still single. Her own sister tells her that there is certainly a problem with her: “This servitude makes you to keep unwed” (2.1.26). However, this uncomfortable pressure of a society that forces women to marry is what makes Luciana look for an answer. That is precisely the reason why she tries to excuse herself for her unlucky social status by saying, “ere I learn love, I’ll practice to obey” (2.1.29). Luciana knows that for the Renaissance time wealth was the target not only for women but also for men. She is certainly not ignorant about this; on the contrary, she acknowledges how unlikely is for a woman who has possessions like her to be happily married because most men would reach her moved by money, and not by true love as it seems to be Adriana’s case. Indeed, it is this attitude of resistance to be subjected to male will that encourages Luciana to complain with Antipholus by saying: “if you did wed my sister for her wealth, / Then for her wealth’s sake use her with more kindness” (3.2.57-58). Luciana strongly refuses to just receive orders instead of love and a fair treatment.
Therefore, in the Renaissance, women in general whether poor or rich, single or married had to live with many disadvantages that kept them far from living a happy life. Notwithstanding, this particular female frustration of the time is not only one of the characteristic topics in literature during those years, but also a subtle reflection of one of the consequences of the historical battle for power in the 17th century between the English and the Irish people.
The Dromios Deserve a Raise: Social Differences in The Comedy of Errors by William Shakespeare (Part I)
William Shakespeare’s farcical play The Comedy of Errors deals with a variety of topics, such as the role of the individual identity on society, family relationships and superstitions. Nevertheless, the dynamics between contrasting social classes and the role of female frustrations in the context of the Renaissance are two aspects that might not be as frequently discussed as the ones aforementioned.
It is the revenge of slaves and women… well, at least for Shakespeare.
How critical are the differences between the upper social classes and the lower ones? Throughout thousands of years the people in power have exploited and humiliated underprivileged groups in almost every corner of the world. Manipulation, insults and physical violence are just some of the ways in which a lot of the men and women who work the hardest are reattributed by their ‘‘ever so magnanimous’’ employers:
Wait, I pay your salary! So, I guess that entitles
me to give you one good smacking or
throw at least one slur against you once in a while; hey, but you’re still
important to us (wink wink).
- Exploitative businessperson / Snotty wealthy woman
William Shakespeare wisely tackled this conflict in The Comedy of Errors where confusion ensues in order to illustrate just how useless and self-centered many rich people and more specifically those Antipholus twins are.
Slaves Dromio of Ephesus and Dromio of Syracuse are as loyal as they can possibly be. They follow their masters and obey everything they are told to do. Notwithstanding, society is full of inequalities, and the two Dromios are hit, dragged, humiliated, harassed and manhandled by either Antipholus of Ephesus or Antipholus of Syracuse. Just as people in England discriminated the Irish during the Renaissance, the slaves dealt with the abuse from the masters (coincidence?) The audience would laugh at these moments of aggression in a stage representation; after all who hasn’t dreamed about hitting those pesky slaves at least once? But wait! Violence it’s reserved only for the underprivileged. A slave hitting his master would be too scandalous and unfunny. Shakespeare was well aware of this.
In the midst of the general confusion, the Dromios show they are resourceful in the back and forth between their two masters as well as in their personal tragedies; they would never abandon the Antipholus twins. Moreover, towards the end of the play, masters and slaves are haunted by their shared superstitions and fear towards the inexplicable. People from contrasting social classes are more similar than some of them would be willing to accept. Even though the slave twins are treated as lesser beings, it is evident that they are needed by the sons of Egeon as much (or even more) as they need their own masters. At the end of the day it’s worth asking oneself: Who is more likely to survive in an extreme situation: The one who is independently skillful or the one who pays to have his problems solved?
Society as we know it has been built upon the hard work and service of humble man and women that somehow happened to be exploited by a few greedy individuals. Ostracism between classes may have been portrayed comically in The Comedy of Errors, but there is a powerful underlying commentary on the way people embrace discrimination and oppression whether it is the 16th century or the year 2010. Of course, these behaviors do not seem to disappear from contemporary society, and most likely they will not. As a matter of fact, this social violence is the stuff those ridiculous soap operas are made of, and those by themselves are socially and intellectually damaging enough.
The Pilgrimage to Canterbury Cathedral
Pilgrimage to Canterbury, Thomas Stothard, 1806Canterbury Tales introduces a group of pilgrims going to Canterbury Cathedral who embody the corruption of the real medieval society. Despite Chaucer’s irony-loaded descriptions of most of the characters, some of them are clearly not intended to be ironic but to allude at the ideals of this society. As we meet characters like The Parson, The Plowman, and The Oxford Student we get the impression that these characters are the ideals that represent the opposite to the corruption and vices of the rest of the characters. Chaucer not only exposes the demoralization of medieval society, he also presents the ideals of this society.
The moral excellence and righteousness of the Oxford Student are evident in his description. The narrator distinguishes this young man for his devotion, goodness, and humbleness. He is also described as a discreet person who doesn’t speak more than what’s necessary, formal, respectful and grateful to those who help him in his education. The Parson is the religious figure that embodies all the virtues that the rest lack. He is a devout church man who, as the Oxford student, lives in poverty, who is everything that the monk, the pardoner, the friar, and all the rest of religious figures are not. Different from them, the parson is a devout, benign, diligent, and patient Christian. Instead of looking for his own advantage, he would offer charity to his poor followers, giving them always a noble example since he thought that if a priest trespasses his Christian duties then common people would for sure go astray. This is a religious figure who is true to his believes since, above all, anything that he would teach to the people he would do it himself first. Chaucer emphasizes his contrast with the rest of the religious figures in the pilgrimage when he declares that “he was a shepherd and no mercenary”. This parson proofs to devote his life to serve and love his Savior by serving and loving his fellows. Together with him walks his brother—a Plowman—who is portrayed also as a good hearted man from the peasant class. The narrator labels him as an “honest worker, good and true” who lives in peace and charity, a man who loves his God and his fellow brothers just as himself, and helps the poor whenever he could. The way in which this set of characters lead their lives corresponds to the teachings in the Christian lore.
Some other characters, however, display the worse of the corruption of pillar institutions in medieval society. With the character of The Summoner, Chaucer achieves to expose the dishonesty of some members of these institutions—in this case, the church. As it is recurrent in Chaucer, the disgusting physical appearance of characters mirrors their vicious inner self. The Summoner is said to make children afraid because of his aspect; ironically, his face is compared to that of a “cherubin” but this is not because of his angelical aspect, it is because of carbuncles, which are disgusting infectious abscesses in the skin. Besides his physical appearance, this Summoner has a very peculiar behavior, considering that he works for the ecclesiastical court, according to the narrator he likes drinking, shouting, and jabbering as if crazy. He is compared to a bird who can just repeat anything he is taught but in a hollow/superficial manner, not really meaning it or even understanding it. This is evidently emphasizing the issue of being true to your beliefs or having a double moral. Besides religious figures, the narrator introduces also other members of feudal medieval society. The dealings of this medieval merchant have to do with money, loans, bargains, negotiation and anything that would generate an income to him. Apparently, trade has made him wealthy, and the narrator reveals this in a rather questionable manner. This merchant is portrayed as an unscrupulous mercenary whose dealings are only motivated by his wish for capital increase. His description renders him as an arrogant, suspicious, and self-serving person whose only pursuit was to crook people for his own advantage.
Friday 12 November 2010
The Example Giver
He takes care of the future,
a figure of authority for
his poor followers
with the desire of being rich.
He knows about the bargain
better that a merchant;
he could show to a lawyer
how to do his job.
Without paper and legal education,
he is wiser that many of his companions
and proper as the royalty
and he will defend himself and his followers even in the worst case.
The Noble Pirate
The Captain rode a horse
with the abilities that his noble title gives.
many Vintage he brought
his prisoners he freed.
The noble pirate hero in the seas
an enemy only could see his ship sank
hero from Brattain
and in France people was waiting for him.
An excellent companion he was
every creek he knew
the unbury Maudelayne was his treasure,
and his beard not only shows his wisdom.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)