All’s Well that Ends Well
Well, I finally got the reading group started up again. A member generously offered to host in January, I got the invites out, and we’ve already got enough RSVPs to hold the reading (any less than four, and I cancel).
We’ll be reading All’s Well that Ends Well, which is a play that’s pretty far down the list of plays that I’m familiar with. I think I’ve read it only twice, but both times I had the chance to discuss the play with others: once in a graduate course, and once for a discussion group I was part of. We’ve never done a reading of it, even though my group has been doing monthly readings for over six years now. I have also never seen a production of it, though I may check out the BBC DVD before the reading.
The bottom line is that I’m pretty excited to revisit a play that I remember enjoying very much but don’t necessarily remember why. It didn’t make my Top 25 plays last year, which is not surprising given my limited recollection of the story, but somehow Helena made my list of Top 50 characters, so I guess I’m not completely out to lunch.
One of my favorite scenes (though apparently not one of my Top 50 scenes in Shakespeare) was the scene where Parolles is blindfolded and the soldiers speak in a made-up language to convince him that they are enemy soldiers speaking a foreign language.
Anyway, are there any big All’s Well fans out there? Let’s make some noise. What about this play does it for you? What do we have to look forward to?
December 10th, 2008 at 11:49 pm
I staged managed a fascinating production of this play some years ago. It’s never left my thoughts. I think the Parolles scene is brilliant, one of Shakespeares funniest moments. Am I right that it’s often considered a “problem play” because it’s unclear whether it’s a comedy or tragedy? I’ve always considered it a problem play because it is – IMHO – a play about a strong, brilliant, talented woman who falls hopelessly in love with a profound jerk and we’re all supposed to be happy that he’s forced to marry her when I think it’s so apparent that she’d be so very better off without him. I think it’s a sort of tragic “why do smart women make bad choices” play. I’ll be quite interested to hear Shakespeare Teacher’s take on it as his familiarity with it grows….
December 11th, 2008 at 5:26 am
DeLisa, yes, this is considered one of the Problem plays, along with Troilus and Cressida and Measure for Measure. I’ve never really been crazy about the term, since when people use it it’s often unclear to me whether they mean that it’s, as you say, not clear what genre it belongs in or whether they mean that it’s a play about a problem. Both uses of the term seem somewhat widespread. I prefer the term Dark Comedy, because (I think) it’s much clearer what I mean. More on this on Sunday, when I post the fifth lipogram.
But I’m glad to hear your take on the play is so similar to mine. It reminds me of the ending of The Merchant of Venice (which, by the way, sometimes gets labeled a problem play, probably for this reason) where Shylock is forcibly converted to Christianity, and it seems like that’s supposed to make us cheer. Bertram is certainly no prize, so why should we cheer when Helena wins him?
I taught Cymbeline last year, so maybe it’s just clearer in my head, but it would be like watching Imogen marry Cloten. And yet, while that was clearly not Shakespeare’s intent in Cymbeline, it feels like, as you say, we’re supposed to be happy about Bertram and Helena.
I’ll certainly have these questions in my head as we do the reading. Thanks for your comment!
December 11th, 2008 at 11:13 am
This is one of my very favorite WS plays – I’ve been in a production myself and saw the production that DeLisa worked on – some BRILLIANT and very original interpretations in that one that will make excellent discussion in January.
Perhaps “problem play” could be seen as referring to the fact that modern audiences often have a problem with the resolutions of conflicts such as those in AWTEW and MofV (although I realize that this was probably not the intent of those who first coined that particular phrase). Neither Helena’s marriage to the son of a Countess nor the “saving of a Jewish soul” by his conversion to Christianity would be seen as a problem in the context of the 16th and 17th centuries. A woman’s only measure of success in those times was to marry well (meaning financial security, not personal happiness) and Helena’s circumstances practically ensure that she will never marry, much less “well.” And Shylock has presumably gained the kingdom of heaven. But in today’s society, those endings can be considered politically incorrect, unenlightened, even discriminatory.
On a different note, I have always found it interesting that in both of these plays, there are strong elements of traditional fairy tales, which as we know (pre-Disney) all had very dark, deadly elements and have “happy” endings that skew more towards (Christian) morality lessons than toward feminine empowerment. They are neither purely comedic nor deeply tragic – in spite of the fairy tale elements, they are some of his most real and accessible characters and plots, especially in light of DeLisa’s excellent comment about “why do smart women make bad choices.” I don’t think there’s a woman alive who can’t instantly relate to Helena – not only in the sense of wanting a relationship with the wrong guy, but because in many ways she is a very modern woman, and a bit ahead of her time. She has a marketable skill (if she were male, she could call it a profession as her father did), she is single and makes her way into the world, and tries (and eventually succeeds) to choose her own mate.
December 20th, 2008 at 5:40 pm
Well, I picked the play because we haven’t done it and I know the two of you are fans.
But now you’re both getting me excited to revisit the play. And isn’t that what our little group is all about?