Hamlet ~~ Act I Scene V

Hamlet and his Father’s Ghost (1806)
William Blake
source Wikimedia Commons

Hamlet  ~  Act I  Scene V

Hamlet asks the ghost where he is being taken, but the ghost commands him to listen.  His time is almost done when he will depart for Purgatory, but he has important information to relate that includes revenge.  The ghost identifies itself as Hamlet’s father’s ghost and claims that he was murdered by Claudius, as the foul beast committed regicide by pouring a bottle of poison into the king’s ear.  While the ghost censures his wife for her lack of virtuous conduct in the matter, he bids Hamlet to leave her judgement to God.  Hamlet is shocked by the Ghost’s proclamation, but is quick to promise revenge.

Horatio and Marcellus return, begging Hamlet to tell them what happened, yet he prevaricates, hesitant to trust to their silence.  He does however make them swear (numerous times and then upon his sword) never to tell anything that they have witnessed that night.  He also gives an indication that he may act unusually in the future, but even so, they must never, ever give even a hint of why he is exhibiting such behaviour.  They go back to court, with a lament from Hamlet that he has been chosen to set things aright.

Hamlet’s Vision
Pedro Américo
source Wikipedia

Thoughts:

Hamlet is obviously shocked by the ghost’s revelation of his murder, but he is quick to pledge his assistance in revenge.  The ghost convicts Hamlet’s mother of a lack of virtue, stating that a truly virtuous woman would not have been corruptible.  These statements must further influence the way Hamlet views his mother.

One of Hamlet’s statements struck me and perhaps explains his behaviour further on in the play:

“Ay, thou poor ghost, while memory holds a seat
In this distracted globe.  Remember thee!
Yea, from the table of my memory
I’ll wipe away all trivial fond records,
All saws of books, all forms, all pressures past
That youth and observation copied there,
And thy commandment all alone shall live
Within the book and volume of my brain,
Unmixed with baser matter.  Yes, by heaven!”  (96-104)

It’s as if Hamlet has shaken off youth and has grasped responsibility and maturity with a strong hand. This attitude will perhaps explain his behaviour towards Ophelia: his original interest was an adolescent attraction but now he must put away all childish pleasures and concentrate on the task at hand.

This scene is certainly the turning point in Hamlet’s demeanour and conduct.  We expect to see a different man from now on.

Hamlet in the presence of his father’s ghost
John Gilbert
source Wikimedia Commons

Quotes:

“O most pernicious woman!
O villain, villain, smiling, damnèd villain!”  (105-106)

“There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.”  (168-169)

Hamlet Read-Along Posts

Hamlet ~~ Act I, Scene IV

Hamlet ~  Act I  Scene IV

It is just past twelve and Hamlet, Horatio and Marcellus are awaiting the ghost, when they hear reveling from the castle.  It is Claudius, drinking and partying, and while Hamlet explains to Horatio, it is their custom, he wishes they would not practice it because their drinking lessens their reputation in the eyes of other countries.
Hamlet sees the ghost of his father (1843)
Eugene Delacroix
source Wikiart
The Ghost appears and Hamlet asks why it walks the earth and what is its purpose.  It beckons Hamlet to follow and, against both Horatio’s and Marcellus’ pleas, he complies, struggling with them and fending them off with threats and his sword.  His friends lament his choice and Marcellus delivers the well-known line: “Something is rotten in the state of Denmark.”  They follow the prince.

Thoughts:

Horatio shows that he is possibly a foreigner by questioning the customs, yet it is not clear with what customs he is unfamiliar.  It is certainly possible that the drinking and partying are Danish customs, yet they could also be court customs and Horatio’s social station is simply not high enough to be aware of them.

Hamlet certainly speaks to the ghost as if it were a ghost, even though it bears the shape and form of his father. 
In this scene, we have the first echoing of the changes in Hamlet, bringing into question his sanity.  Horatio speaks almost a prophecy:
Hamlet Act I, Scene IV (1796)
Henry Fuseli
source Wikimedia Commons
“What if it tempt you toward the flood, my lord,
Or to the dreadful summit of the cliff
That beetles o’er his base into the sea,
And there assume some other horrible form,
Which might deprive your sovereignty of reason
And draw you into madness?  Think of it.
The very place puts toys of desperation,
Without more motive, into every brain
That looks so many fathoms to the sea
And hears it roar beneath.”
Hamlet makes reference to his fate: “My fate cries out,”which echoes of Greek tragedy where the character is often at the mercy of the circumstance and is helpless to escape it.

And Marcellus delivers the well-known quote:  “Something is rotten in the state of Denmark.”  So far we have a few things rotten:  King Hamlet’s death, Claudius’ kingship, Gertrude and Claudius’ hasty marriage, a possible confrontation with Fortinbras, the appearance of the ghost, the questionable relationship between Hamlet and Ophelia ….. have I missed anything?

Hamlet Read-Along Posts
Act I  Scene III

Act I  Scene IV

Hamlet ~~ Act I, Scene III

Ophelia (1905)
Odilon Redon
source Wikiart

Hamlet  ~  Act I,  Scene III

Laertes prepares to embark on his journey back to France, but, as he speaks to his sister Ophelia, he brings into question Hamlet’s love for her.  He cautions that Hamlet’s first loyalty is to the kingdom on Denmark and, if personal relationships get in the way, he will choose country over love.  Oh sister, keep you love under control and your virtue guarded lest you experience future regret, and Ophelia agrees to his plea, but oddly tells him only if he takes his own advice.

Polonius enters and gives his son advice on how to conduct himself respectfully and honourably.

“……. Give thy thoughts no tongue,
Nor any unproportioned thought his act.
Be thou familiar but by no means vulgar.
Those friends thou hast, and their adoption tried,
Grapple them unto thy soul with hoops of steel,
But do not dull thy palm with entertainment
Of each new-hatched, unfledged comrade.  Beware
Of entrance to a quarrel, but being in,
Bear ‘t that th’ opposèd may beware of thee.
Give every man thy ear but few thy voice.
Take each man’s censure but reserve thy judgement.
Costly thy habit as thy purse can buy,
But not expressed in fancy — rich, not gaudy,
For the apparel oft proclaims the man,
And they in France of the best rank and station
Are of a most select and generous chief in that.
Neither a borrower nor a lender be,
For loan oft loses both itself and friend,
And borrowing dulls the edge of husbandry.
This above all: to thine own self be true.
And it must follow, as the night the day
Thou canst not then be false to any man.”

At Laertes’ departure, Polonius inquires at to what they were speaking of, and Ophelia relates that he has cautioned her about Hamlet.  Polonius supports his son’s advice and, though Ophelia tells of Hamlet’s recent attentions to her, Polonius indicates those attentions are meaningless and that he is, in effect, playing with her feelings.  She needs to conduct herself honourably and really, to have nothing more to do with Hamlet.  She states that she will comply with her father’s wishes.

Ophelia and Laertes
William Gorman Wills
source Wikipedia

Thoughts:

The beginning of this scene contains a number of cautions and instruction to both Ophelia and Laertes on how to live in a way that will benefit them.  It’s as if the keys to a happy life are given to them to use if they choose.  Why?  Why so many cautions given to each other in this family?  I can see Laertes being wise enough to pick up on the uncomfortableness of the situation at court. Perhaps he senses that the situation will come to a head and that Hamlet will be diverted by his political responsibility with no time for courting, and he wishes to advise his sister to spare her feelings.  As for Polonius’ warnings to Laertes, I’m less certain.  Polonius doesn’t seem particularly bright, so far, but his advice is sound.  What prompted it?  Is he simply giving fatherly counsel ….???

This scene also gives us the first exposure to Hamlet and Ophelia’s relationship.  Is there a hint that she is being a little too free with her behaviour?  From the words of her father and brother, it appears she is a young, unexperienced girl who is taking the attentions of a man who is her superior, too much to heart.  She foolishly believes him when he is really just toying with her affections.  And what does this say about Hamlet?  Is our prince really so insincere?  Is he also being portrayed as being young and immature, or are Laertes and Polonius overreacting?

Hamlet Read-Along Posts
Act I  Scene III 

Hamlet ~ Act I Scene II

The Queen consoles Hamlet (1834)
Act I, Scene II
Eugene Delacroix
source Wikimedia Commons

Hamlet  ~~  Act I,  Scene II

The new King, Hamlet’s brother Claudius, laments the old king’s passing and claims that he wed the Queen in both mirth and sadness.  He hints that Fortinbras thinks the kingdom weak because of King Hamlet’s death and says he has contacted the King of Norway, Fortinbras’ uncle, who is debilitated and bedridden, to stop his nephew’s plotting.  He sends Cornelius and Voltemand to deliver another letter to Norway.

John Barrymore as Hamlet (1922)
source Wikipedia

Laertes, son of Polonius, asks leave to return to France since he has done his duty by attending Claudius’ coronation.  After securing Polonius’ opinion, Claudius allows him to go, and then turns to Hamlet, asking why “clouds still hang on (him)”. Gertrude, the Queen, urges her son to accept her new husband and no longer mourn his father’s death. Hamlet claims his grief surpasses what can be viewed on the surface, yet Claudius pleads with him to stave off his melancholy, as it is not manly and goes against God and nature.  He is Hamlet’s new father and wishes him to remain near him instead of going to Wittenberg, as Hamlet plans.  Hamlet agrees.

Hamlet then laments his father’s death and agonizes over the alacrity with which his mother remarried after her apparent devotedness to her first husband.  Horatio, Marcellus and Barnardo appear and Hamlet questions why they aren’t in Wittenberg, whereupon they reply that they came for his father’s funeral.  Hamlet mentions his mother’s marriage and then claims to see his father in his imagination.  It’s the perfect opening for the sentinels, who tell him of the ghost of his father.  He asks of its appearance and if his friends are armed, then promises to meet them that night between eleven and twelve o’clock.

“My father’s spirit in arms.   All is not well.
I doubt some foul play.  Would the night were come!
Till then sit still, my soul.  Foul deeds will rise,
Though all the earth o’erwhelm them, to men’s eyes.”

Hamlet and Ophelia (1883)
Mikhail Vrubel
source Wikiart

Thoughts:

Right away the reader can tell Claudius has taken over kingship of Denmark by his royal diction, using “we” and “ourselves” to describe his person.  He highlights the danger to the kingdom by Fortinbras, seeks assistance from a weak old man, and claims that he has followed Polonius’ advice, these points deliberately made both to cement his power by placing fear in the hearts of Denmark’s people, and also to deflect complete blame of any of his actions from himself, as he makes Polonius an accomplice by his words.  Quite clever machinations from this new monarch.  His devious manipulation of the situation, and the apparent trust of all but Hamlet, create a setting for future troubles.

A post for a production of Hamlet
ca. 1884, showing several of the
key scenes
source Wikipedia

The question begs, why did the kingship pass to Claudius?  It makes sense that Hamlet would have been in line for the crown after his father.  Did Claudius step in and take possession of the country without protest from Hamlet?  Was there some sort of unique hereditary procedure in this case?

Does Claudius want Hamlet to remain with him instead of going to Wittenberg, so he can keep a watchful eye on him? The fact that King Hamlet’s father has only been dead two months makes Claudius’ words to Hamet about his suffering appear manipulative and only intended to further is own agenda.  That Gertrude supports him makes her suspect as well.  With her marrying Claudius so soon after her husband’s death, it is no wonder Hamlet is tormented and conflicted.  Hamlet sees his father as an exemplary figure, nearly a saint, and his treatment at the hands of those closest to him, tears him apart.  He blames his mother more for the speed of her re-marriage although he does mention “incestuous sheets,” indicating her marriage to her brother-in-law is, at least in Hamlet’s eyes, criminal.

With regard to Horatio, why does Hamlet say, “I am glad to see you well. —- Horatio?  Or do I forget myself?”  If Horatio is truly his friend, why is Hamlet uncertain of his name or his recognition of him?  Is this evidence that he is not thinking clearly given the tragedy that he has experienced?


Hamlet Read-Along Posts
Act I  Scene II
Act I  Scene III

Hamlet ~ Act I, Scene I

We have begun Hamlette’s read-along of Hamlet for the month of October!  I’m happy to be guided by such an expert (she’ll tell you that she’s not an expert, but I’d hazard to guess that she has more understanding than most of us) through this play and I can’t wait to learn some more insights into Shakespeare’s masterpiece.  You can find the details at The Edge of the Precipice.

___________________________________________________


Hamlet  ~  Act I,  Scene I

As Horatio replaces Fransisco at his place as sentinel, the two other sentinels, Barnardo and Marcellus try to convince him that a ghost has appeared to them the last two nights while on watch. As they attempt to persuade the sceptic, the Ghost appears and Horatio, being the more learned of the three, attempts to communicate with him, in rather stern and commanding language, whereupon the Ghost disappears.

They recognize him as the late king Hamlet and wonder why he appears to them in his armour.  Horatio speculates with a story:  the late king defeated and killed king Fortinbras of Norway after an aggresive attack, yet his son is not honouring the tradition of lands to the winner, and it is rumoured that he’s going to gather some mercenaries and mount an attack against Denmark. The two now understand why the Ghost has appeared in battle gear and add that, like in ancient Rome in the times before Caesar’s death, there has been portents proceeding this possible altercation.

Yet once again the Ghost materializes, and Horatio has enough quickness and intelligence to question it about the fate of Denmark and to inquire if it knows of any treasure hoarded away.  The cock crows and, despite their efforts to waylay it with Marcellus’ sword, the Ghost, once again, withdraws.

Marcellus laments that they chose to practice violence on it, but Horatio states that a cock crowing could signal the approach of morning and that all spirits must return to their “confine(s)”.  It is said a cock also crows before Christmas, Marcellus adds, but Horatio stops him to herald the dawn:

“But look, morn, in russet mantle clad, 
Walks o’er the dew of yon high eastward hill.”

He suggests that they fetch Hamlet for they are sure that the Ghost will speak with him.

Thoughts:

Horatio’s initial disbelief, and then his first encounter with the ghost, starts the building tension in this scene.  He is obviously the most intelligent and sensible of the three, as his surmises and observations are well reasoned and insightful and he recommends fetching Hamlet.

Listening to the Cock (1944)
Marc Chagall
source Wikiart

A parallel between the former battle with Fortinbras and a possible new fight with his son, also called Fortinbras, can be conjectured by the Ghost king’s appearance in battle array.  It’s also possibly important to note that he first appears to the sentinels.  Yet he declines to speak with them.  Is he put off by their manners, or is he wanting conversation with someone else, and, if so, why didn’t he just appear to the person with whom he wishes to speak?

Importance might also be placed on the parallels between Fortinbras and his son, and king Hamlet and his son. With regard to Fortinbras Jr., already he has broken the traditional and honourable actions of forfeiting lands to the battle victor by legal document. And instead of raising an army from among his country’s soldiers, he has chosen to build an army from among the city’s hooligans.  Fortinbras Sr. & King Hamlet both esteemed obedience to tradition, honour and, to a certain degree, trust.  Fortinbras Jr.’s actions have shown disrespect and contempt, not only towards his enemy, but towards those important customs.  What will Hamlet’s actions prove?

The cock crowing is also a significant occurrence.  Certainly, cocks crow to herald a new day, but more importantly, in the New Testament, a cock crowed to portend the betrayal of Jesus by Peter:

“Truly I tell you,” Jesus answered, “this very night, before the rooster crows, you will disown me three times.”  Matthew 26:34

Betrayal just has to be an upcoming theme, but betrayal of whom and why?  We shall find out in the upcoming acts!

Hamlet Read-Along Posts
Act I  Scene I

Hamlet Read-Along

Finally, Hamlette at The Edge of the Precipice is having her promised Hamlet Read-Along and I am so in!  This play is one of my favourites of Shakespeare’s.  Is Hamlet mad or is he incredibly deceptive, that is the question?

I’ve read this play one and a half times already, so this time I’ll be able to dig even deeper into the characters’ psyches.

Hamlette has also compiled a list of books to read which deal with the play in her post Hamlet 101.  If you are looking for some extra reading, please check out her list.

So whether you are a Shakespeare aficionado or are reading him for the first time, please join us on October 1st for the Hamlet Read-Along.   Personally, I can’t wait!

The Winter’s Tale by William Shakespeare

“What’s gone and what’s past help, should be past grief.”

Leontes, King of Sicilia and Polixenes, King of Bohemia, grew up together in a type of idyllic paradise, becoming as close as brothers.  At the opening of the play, Polixenes has been visiting Leontes and his queen, Hermoine, and is ready to return home after his nine-month stay.  Leontes begs his friend to remain longer, yet when he refuses, the king employs the queen’s pleading to try to change his mind.  And change his mind, Polixenes, does, unwittingly sparking a torrential storm of jealously within Leontes, as he, with Gollum-like psychosis, convinces himself that Hermoine has been unfaithful to him with his friend, and that the child she is about to give birth to does, in fact, belong to Polixenes.    Attempting to gain the sympathy of a Sicilian nobleman, Camillus, Leontes reveals his plot to poison the Bohemia king, but Camillus’ sensible and gentle nature will not allow him to commit such an atrocity and instead, he warns Polixenes and they both escape to the kingdom of Bohemia. Yet their escape leaves Hermoine at the mercy of her husband’s wrath and, against all the protests of his noblemen and, in particular, the wife of Antigonus, Paulina, Leontes tries Hermoine with the intent to condemn her to death.  While imprisoned she bears the child, a girl, who Leontes entrusts to Antigonus to abandon it in the wild, whereupon Antigonus leaves the child in the kingdom of Bohemia.  But tragedy strikes when part way through the hearing, Leontes learns of the death of his only son, Maxmillus.  Hermoine faints, then dies and Leontes suddenly realizes his foolish behaviour and repents.

Act II, Scene III
John Opie/Jean Pierre Simon
source Wikipedia

The child of Hermoine, Perdita, grows up in Bohemia as the daughter of a shepherd and we meet her again when she is sixteen and the love of Florizel, the son of Polixenes.  Through a quarrel with his father, Florizel and Perdita seek sanctuary in Sicilia, where Leontes has been spending the last 16 years doing penance for his harsh actions.  Paulina, in control of the situation as ever, makes Leontes promise not to marry unless a women in the likeness of Hermoine is approved by her, and he consents.  She then takes him to see a statue of his dead wife but lo!  This statue moves and Hermoine is alive again! There is much rejoicing and more when the identity of Perdita is discovered.  Winter has melted away from Sicilia and spring has come once again!

Perdita
Anthony Frederick Augustus Sandys
source Wikipedia

I really felt that this was certainly a weaker play of Shakespeare’s.  The audience was asked to immediately accept Leontes intemperate jealousy without any back-story or obvious proof of unwise behaviour on either the part of Hermoine or Polixenes.  What would cause a person who has always trusted and had the best relation with this friend, to suddenly question his character and honesty?  No other character believed in Hermoine’s guilt, yet Leontes persists in his delusion.

I also was taken aback by some of the staging of the play.  One senses that much of the important action takes place off stage:  the reason or backstory for Leontes’ jealousy; a reason for his immediate contrition; and shockingly, the climax with the reunion and reconciliations is not shown to us but told to us through a third party medium.  I’m still trying to grasp Shakespeare’s purpose in this structure.  The lack of all these critical ingredients cries lack of development and therefore, a lack of impact.  It’s not sensible, it’s not plausible and it’s certainly far from Shakespeare’s usually masterly grasp of his material and his audience.  I remain, puzzled.

I read this play for my Shakespeare: From the Page to the Stage course.

Othello ~ the Movies

I don’t usually do movie reviews on my blog, but it was necessary that I complete one for my Back to the Classics Challenge for 2014.  So I moved the books on my list around a bit to target a movie that I’d want to watch and came up with Othello.  And instead of watching only one DVD version, I watched four!

Play/Performance:  The first one was a 2008 production by Shakespeare’s Globe Theatre, starring Eamonn Walker as Othello and Tim McInnerny as Iago.  While I liked this production, I would probably term it as adequate.  In Othello, Iago is the hub of the story and I have to admit, McInnerny’s performance was not outstanding.  His lines were delivered with a good amount of monotonal yelling (this could be because the production was performed at the Globe and the actors needed to project), but overall, he acted on one level with very few nuances or investigation into the character. Walker’s performance of Othello was more engaging as he embodied an intensity of character which added to the play.  With a better Iago, I would have given it four stars.

Rating:  ★★★

______________________________



Movie:  Next I watched the 1981 BBC Production starring Anthony Hopkins as Othello and Bob Hoskins as Iago.  Needless to say, it was a little hard to see Hopkins as Othello.  He’s quite slight and came across more dainty than I was expecting.  The personality of a forceful Moorish military commander didn’t quite break through and the darkened face was sometimes distracting rather than credible.  However, Hoskins as Iago was fantastic.  He lent just the right charm, teasing, roughness and pathological bent to a character that is as varied as he is hateful.  His performance made the play for me.  Without him, I would have only given it 3 stars.  The character of Emilia was also well performed and her speech to Othello at the end of the play is truly electrifying. In fact, most of the lesser characters gave great performances.

Rating:  ★★★

_____________________________

Movie:  Put me out of my misery.  Honestly, I couldn’t finish this 2008 movie adaptation.  No one gave a stellar performance and the actor who played Iago was atrocious!  Is there a worse word than “atrocious”?  If so, I’d use it.  Carlo Rota played Othello and Matthew Deslippe was Iago.  Too bad they didn’t give him “de-slip” right out of the movie.  Ha ha! …… Okay, that was a bad joke!  In any case, he delivered his lines woodenly, yet also like he was struggling to fit them into a comfortable syntax.  I’d never heard of him before as an actor, and now I perhaps know why.  It just wasn’t worth my time to complete watching this one.

Rating:  ★★

______________________________

Movie:  And the last performance watched was the 1995 movie production of Othello starring Laurence Fishburne as Othello and Kenneth Branagh as Iago.  How can you go wrong with Branagh?  Seriously, you just can’t.  There is slight embellishment, or perhaps interpretation is a better word, and, of course, there was the prerequisite sex scene where in the play it is uncertain whether Othello and Desdemona have consummated their marriage, but really, it’s a solid performance by all. Bravo!

Rating:  ★★★


Richard II by William Shakespeare

” For God’s sake, let us sit upon the ground
And tell sad stories of the death of kings ….”

Why do they call this play a “history”?  It was an absolutely tragedy …. gut-wrenchingly tragic, and I still feel depressed about the outcome.  Dare I say this is my favourite Shakespearean play so far?  Isn’t that weird?  An historical play about a king of whom I knew little about ……..  Yet Shakespeare’s verse is astonishingly beautiful.  The words flow around you like a bubbling river, conveying the anguish, terror, loss, loyalty, courage, deception, abandonment and hopelessness.  Not only is the play alive, but the story is alive and the words have a life of their own.

Richard II, King of England
portrait at Westminster Abbey (mid-1390s)
source Wikipedia

The play begins with a dispute between Henry Bullingbrook (Bolingbroke), cousin to King Richard, and Thomas Mowbray, Bullingbrook accusing Mowbray of misappropriating money and claiming that he was part of the murder of the Duke of Gloucester (which was probably orchestrated by Richard), yet before either can accomplish a duel, King Richard decides to banish both, Bullingbrook for 6 years and Mowbray for the term of his life.  John of Gaunt, is broken hearted at the exile of his son, Bullingbrook, and soon becomes sick with grief.  Upon Gaunt’s death, Richard decides to expropriate his estates and money, thereby defrauding Bullingbrook of his inheritance.  As Richard leaves to deal with the wars in Ireland, Bullingbrook gathers supporters and lands in England for the purpose, it appears, of regaining what is rightfully his.  Because Richard has taxed his subjects without remiss, and has fined the nobility for errors of their ancestors, most of the nobles rise up against him.

John of Gaunt
father of Henry IV
source Wikipedia

When Richard returns to England he is left with a small contingent of supporters including his cousin Aumerle, the Duke of York’s son, and lords Salisbury and Berkeley and other retainers.  Upon meeting with Bullingbrook, Richard relinquishes the throne to him, and Bullingbrook wastes no time in appointing himself King Henry IV.  Immediately, Richard is placed in prison.  When an uprising by Aumerle is discovered by his father and vehemently exposed, Aumerle is graciously pardoned by Henry IV, yet with dire threats towards the other conspirators.  In prison, Richard attacks his warden in frustration and is killed by Exton; when Henry hears about the murder, he is distressed and the play ends with his sad lament.

When I finished this play, I was so anguished by Richard’s sad end and how he’d been treated, yet reading some pre-history would have perhaps measured my emotions, as the good king was not entirely as innocent as he is made out.  Richard inherited the title of king when he was 10 years old and spent many years of his reign under the control of counsellors and advisors.  It wasn’t until later on, that he appeared to throw off their power and come into his own.  However, the fact that he taxed the populous to such extreme extents to finance his wars and royal coffers, contributed to the fact that he was not well loved or respected.  He was a king who ruled by impulse and without a justness that would have connected him to the people.  In fact, in the play, when he is walked through the streets, people dump garbage on his head, not a very fitting display for a monarch who truly believed that he was anointed by God.

Richard being taken into custody
by the Earl of Northumberland
source Wikipedia

Another consideration is that Shakespeare is writing drama.  He is known for taking the framework of history and then chopping and changing and perhaps, speculating for dramatic and political effect.   It is interesting that at the end of the play, Richard is seen as a pitiful figure who has voluntarily given up his kingship, and Bullingbrook condemns his murder, leaving the new king innocent of the crime and helpless to stop its culmination.  A very safe and uncontroversial tact on both sides for our playwright!

My favourite speech of Richard’s pulses with foresight, nostalgia and lament:

“For God’s sake let us sit upon the ground 
And tell sad stories of the death of kings:
How some have been deposed, some slain in war,
Some haunted by the ghosts they have deposed,
Some poisoned by their wives, some sleeping killed.
All murdered.  For within the hollow crown
That rounds the mortal temples of a king
Keeps Death his court and there the antic sits,
Scoffing his state and grinning at his pomp,
Allowing him a breath, a little scene,
To monarchize, be feared and kill with looks,
Infusing him with self and vain conceit,
As if this flesh which walls about our life,
Were brass impregnible.  And humoured thus,
Comes at the last and with a little pin
Bores through his castle walls, and farewell king!”

As Richard begins to realize the possible outcome of the circumstances and tries to reconcile them with his belief that a king is sanctioned by God, we see his syntax begin to break down, with his pronouns of “we”, being reduced to “I”.  It is truly pitiful.

Richard II
Anonymous impress from the 16th century
source Wikipedia

On a political note, this play was used to stir up populous support for Robert, earl of Essex, Queen Elizabeth I’s one-time favourite, during his rebellion against her.  On the eve of the uprising, his supporters paid for the play, Richard II, to be performed at the Globe Theatre, but Essex’s attempt to raise a coup against her failed. Retaliation was swift, however.  On February 25, 1601, Essex faced his execution and was beheaded on the Tower Green.  His was the last beheading at the Tower of London.

This was another wonderful experience with one of Shakespeare’s historical plays.  I had expected to like them least in the canon, but they are certainly quickly becoming by far my favourites!

Watched:  The Hollow Crown:  Richard II

Othello by William Shakespeare

“O, beware, my lord, of jealousy;
It is the green-ey’d monster, which doth mock
The meat it feeds on.”

Othello the Moor is lauded over Venice for his help in attempts to rid them of the pesky Turks in their battle over Cyprus.  Yet when Othello weds the beautiful Venetian Desdemona in secret, some opinions of his prowess change, notably those of Desdemona’s father.  And unbeknownst to Othello, Iago, his third-in-command, is plotting a dastardly revenge for being passed over for promotion, the position being given to Othello’s loyal lieutenant, Cassio.  Hence proceeds perhaps the most shocking example of manipulation in literature, as Iago takes possession of Othello’s mind and emotions, like a beast taking possession of its prey, transforming our noble Moor from a honest, straightforward, respected man into an enraged, vengeful monster who believes every evil of his innocent wife, including her unfaithfulness with his second-in-command, Cassio.  Othello’s jealousy manages to eclipse anything within our understanding.

Abd el-Ouahed ben Messaoud
ben Mohammed Anoun,
Moorish ambassador to Elizabeth I
suggest inspiration for Othello
source Wikipedia

Iago reveals that, as well as the injury of being passed over for promotion, he also harbours a suspicion that Othello has been sleeping with his wife, Emilia, who is Desdemona’s lady-in-waiting.  There is no proof of this accusation in the play, and it is likely that Iago is expecting people to act with the same lack of integrity and base bestial urges, that he himself would, in the same circumstances.

How does a gentle and admired military leader allow himself to be reduced to a maddened beast, his fury leading him to commit the worst atrocity against a perfectly innocent human being, and one who has loved and supported him through their short marriage?  What hidden button inside Othello’s psyche has Iago discovered and pushed, knowing that it will make him snap?

Maria Malibran as Rossini’s
Desdemona
Françoise Bouchot
source Wikipedia

Certainly there are various issues that come into play and work against Othello.  He is used to being a commander, yet is unused to being a husband and obviously, when in love, is out of his depth.  Perhaps he sees Desdemona as a possession that he has conquered and, instead of being able to relax in his marriage, he, like a military leader, feels that he must wage battle to keep her.  And when difficulties do arise, instead of trying to search out the truth, he acts like a military leader and attempts to “conquer the enemy”.  He has insecurities that lead to him being a willing pawn of Iago’s machinations. The jealousy that Iago is able to set aflame within him, corrupts his normal good sense and his actions become intemperate.  I certainly have compassion for his state, as I believe these aspects have severely affected his decison-making and emotional state, but, that said, he is still human and he still has the option of choice.  He knows right from wrong, yet he decides to allow his emotions to rule and himself to be led down the tragic path of mindless jealousy.  In reality, he allows himself to turn into a beast.

Othello & Desdemona
Antonio Muñoz Degrain
source Wikipedia

Shakespeare’s exhibits an uncanny ability to weave endless possibilities into a Gordian knot of drama and draw the reader into his poetic spell.  Will we ever know exactly what motivated Othello and his spiral from an honourable man to a madly jealous murderer.  Will we ever understand why he believed Iago without any “ocular proof”?  What happened to the military commander that must have been used to exhibiting self-control?  Do intense emotions subvert our ability to act as a human beings?  There are so many avenues to explore and no obvious or set answers.

Of all the characters in the play, my favourite character was Emilia.  While she remains surprisingly unaware of the plotting and intrigues of her husband, upon realizing the truth, she becomes the voice of the audience, who has until this point been mute in horror, and satisfyingly spews vile recriminations on the head of Othello.

T.S. Eliot had a different view of the last actions of Othello than many older critics:

“I have always felt that I have never read a more terrible exposure of human weakness — of universal human weakness — than the last great speech of Othello.  I am ignorant whether any one else has ever adopted this view, and it may appear subjective and fantastic in the extreme.  It is usually taken on its face value, as expressing the greatness in defeat of a noble but erring nature. What Othello seems to me to be doing in making this speech is cheering himself up. He is endeavouring to escape reality, he has ceased to think about Desdemona, and is thinking about himself. Humility is the most difficult of all virtues to achieve; nothing dies harder than the desire to think well of oneself. Othello succeeds in turning himself into a pathetic figure, by adopting an aesthetic rather than a moral attitude, dramatising himself against his environment. He takes in the spectator, but the human motive is primarily to take in himself. I do not believe that any writer has ever exposed this bovarysme, the human will to see things as they are not, more clearly than Shakespeare.”

I read this play as part of a Shakespeare: From the Page to the Stage course that I’m taking online, and it’s definitely moved in among my favourites!

Laurence Fishburne & Kenneth Branaugh
Othello 1995
source Wikipedia