Via News on the Rialto we find an article about comic book versions of Shakespeare’s plays with updated simplified language:

Shakespeare’s plays are being rewritten as comic strips for pupils who find his poetry boring, it emerged today.

Thousands of teenagers are to study cartoon versions of famous plays such as Macbeth which reduce finely-crafted passages to snappy phrases.

The publishers hope the comics – illustrated by artists who have worked on the Spiderman series – will inspire disaffected readers with a love of the Bard’s plays.

No disrespect to Spiderman, but this won’t instill anyone with a love for anything, and certainly not the Bard’s plays. Shakespeare writes using the language of poetry, which means that every word choice is significant. The interplay, music, and structure of the language is fundamental in Shakespeare’s development of plot, character, and theme. You can’t just use your Spidey sense to paraphrase this stuff and call it Shakespeare.

The Shakespeare Geek demonstrates why.

I actually like the idea of comic book versions of Shakespeare plays, as long as they use the original language. You can even abbreviate the language in comic book form. But once you take away the language, you are no longer reading Shakespeare. It’s not even dumbed-down Shakespeare. You may as well just read something else.

For example, you may wish to read these comic books that deal with delicate problems for children. It seems that even Spiderman has a secret.

That’s what you get for messing with Shakespeare.

From Henry V:

O! for a Muse of fire, that would ascend
The brightest heaven of invention;
A kingdom for a stage, princes to act
And monarchs to behold the swelling scene.

Shift around the letters, and it becomes:

Be kind now and forgive this, our feeble enhanced figments of normal historical events, a great tale confounded with hotshot actors among cheap sets.

From Henry IV, Part Two:

I know thee not, old man: fall to thy prayers;
How ill white hairs become a fool and jester!

Shift around the letters, and it becomes:

The newly-anointed Henry was too rehabilitated to hallo his former fellow Jack. Poms!

From Henry IV, Part One:

The better part of valour is discretion; in the which better part, I have saved my life.

Shift around the letters, and it becomes:

To thrive in craven humility’s theoretic depth is preferable to a swift brave death.

I had the pleasure of seeing Richard III at Nicu’s Spoon Theatre. I had a wonderful experience, and I would recommend it to any fan of the play (it’s my favorite) who is in the New York City area.

The title role was played by Henry Holden, who has an artificial leg and used crutches to get around the stage. This was presented as Richard’s deformity. However, the actor skillfully embodied such a deformity of spirit in the role that the artificial leg was quickly overshadowed. This physicality was especially important, since Holden only spoke the lines that Richard speaks to the audience. When Richard was in public, his lines were spoken by a second actor, Andrew Hutcheson, who was positioned upstage left with a lectern and a reading light, while Holden remained as the physical Richard.

Typically, such production concepts turn me off immediately, but it worked particularly well here, in no small part due to the richly resonant voice of Hutcheson who overflowed the small house with Shakespeare the way it was meant to be performed. (His bio says he toured as the Beast in Beauty and, so that should give you a sense of the instrument at work here.) Also, having two actors playing Richard highlighted the contrast between Public Richard and Private Richard. The director (Heidi Lauren Duke) also had the freedom to underscore the more poignant moments by having a character deliver a line addressed to Richard to Hutcheson instead of Holden, or to have both actors speak a line in unison. And Hutcheson turning off his reading lamp to signify Richard’s death was a nice touch.

It would be difficult to review this show without mentioning the performance of Wynne Anders in the role of Queen Margaret. That’s a fantastic role, and she was absolutely riveting every moment she was on stage. But for me, the standout performance of the show was in the role of Queen Elizabeth, played by Rebecca Challis. In the scene with Richard, after he has killed her children, I could really feel her pain and hatred. That’s a tough scene (my favorite), and she nailed it.

Tickets are a steal at $18, and the theatre is conveniently located at 38 W 38th Street, between 5th and 6th Avenues. Hurry if you want to see it; the play is only running one more week. It closes on July 29.

If you do see the show, you can discuss it in the comments section of this post. If you really like the show, you can give them some good buzz at the New York Innovative Theatre Awards website.

WARNING: Comments may contain further discussion of the show, including potential spoilers.

From King Richard II:

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

Shift around the letters, and it becomes:

Plantagenet’s ass took to the dirt and thus sighed OK eulogies for snuffed lords.

UPDATE: A more family-friendly version…

Plantagenet’s tush took to the dirt and so asked eulogies for snuffed lords. (Sigh!)

So, this article has been getting a lot of attention on the Internet, and I feel I need to respond:

In a radio programme to be aired today, Scots historian Fiona Watson and literary expert Molly Rourke claim the story of Macbeth was penned by a Scottish monk on St Serf’s Island in the middle of Loch Leven 400 years before William Shakespeare even drew breath.

Pause for laughter.

In Macbeth the Highland King to be broadcast on BBC Radio Scotland, Watson says Macbeth and his wife, Gruoch, were in fact “respected, God-fearing folk”.

According to Watson, the “almost entirely fantastical view” of Macbeth and Lady Macbeth drawn by William Shakespeare is lifted, almost word for word in places, from a collection of folklore recorded by St Serf’s monk, Andrew de Wyntoun.

Wow, there’s so much wrong with that, it’s hard to know where to start.

First of all, the “almost word for word” case is never made, at least not in the article. The few points of similarity between the two texts that are mentioned are dealt with below. But there really was a historical Macbeth, and so any two accounts of his life are bound to have some similarities, whether they be historical or legendary.

Did Shakespeare have an “almost entirely fantastical view” of Macbeth? Yes. He was a playwright, not a historian. He often made changes to history to suit his dramatic purposes. That’s what he’s supposed to do. He was also writing for King James, who was a direct descendant of both Malcolm and Banquo. So of course he’s going to make them good and noble and make Macbeth a savage butcher. He knew which side of his bread was buttered.

Also, the Andrew Wyntoun text is from 1420. How is that “400 years before William Shakespeare even drew breath” which he first did in 1564? And if the text really were from 1164, it would not be at all readable to a twenty-first century English-only speaker, as this text somewhat is. Check it out.

But the most striking part of the article is that it completely ignores the fact that we already know what Shakespeare’s source was for the events described. It was Raphael Holinshed’s The Chronicles of England, Scotland, and Ireland. In fact, not only was Holinshed’s Chronicles a major source for Macbeth, but also for King Lear, Cymbeline, and all ten of Shakespeare’s history plays. If you don’t know that, it’s easy to be taken in by the following observation in the article:

Referring to Shakespeare’s prophecy that Macbeth shall be safe until Birnham Wood comes to Dunsinane and that no-one “of woman born” shall harm Macbeth, Rourke explained in Wyntoun’s work: “The person [Macbeth’s mother] met later came and saw her, gave her a ring, and prophesied about what was going to happen in the future. One of the things he said was that this child they’d had would never be killed by man born of woman. Wyntoun also recorded that Macbeth believed he’d never be conquered until the wood of Birnham came to Dunsinane.”

Thanks to the wonderful Furness Collection at the University of Pennsylvania, we can see the source for this on Page 174 of the Historie of Scotland section of Holinshed’s Chronicles:

And suerlie herevpon had he put Makduffe to death, but that a certaine witch, whom hee had in great trust, had told that he should neuer be slaine with man borne of anie woman, nor vanquished till the wood of Bernane came to the castell of Dunsinane.

The witch told Macbeth, like the apparitions do in the play, not a person telling Macbeth’s mother and giving her a ring.

The article continues on with reckless abandon:

The historians claim another element of Wyntoun found in Shakespeare is the three witches that open the play. Wyntoun wrote: “Ane nicht, he thoucht while he was sa settled [that] he saw three women, and they women then thoucht he three Wierd Sisters most like to be.

“The first he heard say, ganging by, ‘lo, yonder the Thane of Cromarty’.

“T’other woman said again ‘of Moray, yonder I see the Thane’.

“The third said ‘yonder I see the king’.”

Rourke and Watson say the resemblance to the witches’ prophesy in Shakespeare’s Macbeth – in which the first hails him as “Thane of Glames”, the second as “Thane of Cawdor” and the third proclaims he shall “be King hereafter” – is too great to be co-incidental.

We simply need to turn back to page 170 of Holinshed to see where Shakespeare found this, and thanks to the extraordinary Folger collection we can see a much easier-to-read copy of Holinshed’s version of the story:

Shortlie after happened a strange and vncouth woonder, which afterward was the cause of much trouble in the realme of Scotland as ye shall after heare. It fortuned as Makbeth and Banquho iournied towards Fores, where the king then laie, they went sporting by the waie togither without other company saue onelie themselues, passing thorough the woods and fields, when suddenlie in the middest of a laund, there met them three women in strange and wild apparell, resembling creatures of elder world, whome when they attentiuelie beheld, woondering much at the sight, the first of them spake and said: All haile Makbeth, thane of Glammis (for he had latelie entered into that dignitie and office by the death of his father Sinell). The second of them said: Haile Makbeth thane of Cawder. But the third said: All haile Makbeth that heereafter shalt be king of Scotland.

I’ll allow you to examine that scene in Shakespeare and decide for yourself which of these two accounts was most likely Shakespeare’s source.

It’s entirely possible that Wyntoun’s work was a source for Holinshed (or Harrison, Leland, etc.), or a source of a source, or at some point they had a common source. But the idea suggested by this article, that Shakespeare somehow “lifted” Macbeth from Wyntoun, is absurd.

UPDATE: A follow-up post.

Taking inspiration from the amazing anagram of the speech from Hamlet, I decided to try my own hand at anagramming Shakespeare. Here is my first attempt, taken from the first lines of King Richard III:

Now is the winter of our discontent
Made glorious summer by this sun of York;
And all the clouds that lour’d upon our house
In the deep bosom of the ocean buried.

Shift around the letters, and it becomes:

The too-sinful Gloucester (later – ouch! – dubbed Richard III), by odious puns on nouns, unkindly compares the momentous War of the Roses end to the foul-mood weather.

That was fun! Maybe I’ll make this a regular feature.

Most crossword puzzles are two-dimensional. They have across and down clues.

This puzzle is one-dimensional. It has forward and backward clues. And all of the answers have to do with Shakespeare.

There’s not much space here, but imagine a horizontal row of 39 squares.

There are no black squares. All answers should be run together one after another with no spaces.

Post whatever you come up with. Feel free to use the comments section of this post to collaborate. The final answer will be a string of 39 letters that can be read in both directions.

Enjoy!

Forward (Left to Right)

1 – 8: Hamlet’s home

9 – 12: Briefly betrothed to Edward IV

13 – 16: The smallest fairy?

17 – 20: “A Lover’s Complaint”

21 – 26: Speaker of “If music be the food of love, play on”

27 – 32: Does Macbeth see one before him?

33 – 39: Twelfth Night‘s Antonio once wore one (2 words)

Backward (Right to Left)

39 – 38: Scotland setting in Macbeth-like film

37 – 32: He is as constant as the northern star

31 – 29: Lear’s Fool will give you two crowns for one of these

28 – 23: The love of Venus

22 – 18: He loved Rosaline first

17 – 14: Companion to Hal and Falstaff at the Boar’s Head

13 – 11: What a piece of work it is!

10 – 5: He knows a bank where the wild thyme blows

4 – 1: Tempest setting

UPDATE: See comments for a big hint by Duane.

UPDATE II: Puzzle solved by Neel Mehta. See comments for answer.

At the risk of appearing like I’m trying to out-geek the Shakespeare Geek, here’s another list.

You’ve seen my top 25 favorite plays and my top 25 favorite scenes (then expanded to 50). Here are my top 50 favorite characters (or groups of characters) from Shakespeare’s plays at the present moment. Enjoy! And feel free to add to the conversation, especially if I’ve left some of your favorites out!

50. The Nurse (Romeo and Juliet) – The play may be a tragedy, but the Nurse is one of the great comic roles in Shakespeare.

49. The Duke of York (Richard the Second) – The remaining son of Edward III is so loyal to the King, he’ll turn in his own son as a traitor.

48. Sir Toby Belch (Twelfth Night) – Think Falstaff without the good manners. Half the time he’s plotting; the other half he’s drunk.

47. The Prince of Morocco & The Prince of Arragon (The Merchant of Venice) – It’s hard to tell which of these two suitors to Portia is more unsuitable, or more hilarious.

46. Dogberry (Much Ado About Nothing) – The muddled constable of the watch who bumbles his way into uncovering the evil plot!

45. Helena (All’s Well That Ends Well) – I’ll never understand what a quality woman like Helena sees in a loser like Bertram. Sigh.

44. Richard the Second (Richard the Second) – Too much philosopher, not enough king. But divine right is divine right. Isn’t it?

43. Philip the Bastard (King John) – When you’re already a bastard, who cares what people think of you? Certainly not Philip.

42. Polonius (Hamlet) – He may be a rash, intruding, doddering old fool, but his madness has a method to it. I think.

41. Beatrice and Benedick (Much Ado About Nothing) – You can’t have one without the other. Sharp banter hiding a deep affection – very cool.

40. Portia (The Merchant of Venice) – Unlike some love interests, Portia is actually worth the winning, and not just for her money.

39. Puck (A Midsummer Night’s Dream) – The mischievous sprite who doesn’t mind helping mortals at times, as long as it’s funny.

38. Mercutio (Romeo and Juliet) – The madcap kinsman to the Prince is a grave man when caught between the two houses.

37. Lucio (Measure for Measure) – This guy is a riot from beginning to end, but slandering the Duke to his disguised face rules.

36. Marc Antony (Multiple plays) – His funeral oration is a masterpiece, but his most powerful line? “I am dying, Egypt, dying.”

35. Viola (Twelfth Night) – Her disguise-as-a-boy plan plunges her in over her head, but she handles it all with grace.

34. Brutus (Julius Caesar) – This was the noblest Roman of them all, deeply conflicted and ultimately his own undoing.

33. Cloten (Cymbeline) – Proud, arrogant, foolish, entitled, and a bully, Cloten is nothing but a suit and a title. Fun!

32. The Earl of Kent (King Lear) – Deeply loyal to the King who has banished him, Kent has something to teach us all.

31. Malvolio (Twelfth Night) – He didn’t really deserve what he got in the play, but he is a Puritan, after all.

30. Jacques (As You Like It) – He’s probably bipolar, but he’s a deep thinker and a keen observer of the human condition.

29. Caliban (The Tempest) – Caliban’s antics are a lot of fun, but I’m more interested in his backstory and its meaning.

28. The Weird Sisters (Macbeth) – Do you think the three witches predict the future? Or do they cause it?

27. Tranio (The Taming of the Shrew) – A servant, who we mostly see playing gentleman. At the end, he’s back to waiting tables.

26. Lewis the Dauphin (Henry the Fifth) – We’re shown Henry’s suitability to be the next French king by seeing a weak Dauphin.

25. Isabella (Measure for Measure) – After all she’s been through, the Duke gives her one final impossible test. She passes.

24. Petruchio & Katherine (The Taming of the Shrew) – When an irresistible force meets an immovable object, somethin’s gotta give…

23. Emilia (Othello) – She’d make her husband a cuckold to make him a king, but won’t cover for his wickedness.

22. Iachimo (Cymbeline) – This “Little Iago” is clever and dishonest, and starts up way more trouble than he means to.

21. Enobarbus (Antony and Cleopatra) – A loyal soldier who can’t support Antony’s self-destructive course, and dies of shame.

20. Goneril & Regan (King Lear) – The wicked ones turn on their father, their husbands, their sister, and finally, each other.

19. Jack Cade (Henry the Sixth, Part Two) – This rough-hewn pretender to the throne would abolish money and kill all the lawyers.

18. Helena (A Midsummer Night’s Dream) – My heart just goes out to Helena, who is such a sweet person and gets rotten treatment.

17. Prospero (The Tempest) – The Duke of Milan, and wise old master of knowledge, books, and the elements of nature.

16. Hamlet (Hamlet) – The melancholy Dane helps us understand that murky place between thought and action.

15. Queen Margaret (Multiple plays) – With an amazing character arc that spans four plays, Margaret puts the “It” back in bitch.

14. Rosalind (As You Like It) – Let’s face it – Rosalind carries the whole plot on force of personality. We like her, so it works.

13. Macbeth (Macbeth) – From noble warrior to homicidal maniac, Macbeth experiences an incredible transformation.

12. Bottom (A Midsummer Night’s Dream) – The megalomaniac actor! We can all recognize him, but do we recognize ourselves in him?

11. Cleopatra (Antony and Cleopatra) – She’s a strong, empowered woman who’s not above using sex as a political tactic.

10. Edmund (King Lear) – A charming villain – all honor on the outside, and evil on the inside. What a bastard!

9. Othello (Othello) – A complex and passionate character, who loved (and trusted) not wisely, but too well.

8. Sir John Falstaff (Multiple plays) – A drunk, a theif, a liar, a glutton, and a pure hedonist. And those are his good points.

7. Duke of Gloucester/ Richard the Third (Multiple plays) – Since he cannot prove a lover, he is determined to prove a villain!

6. Shylock (The Merchant of Venice) – The Jewish moneylender may be the villain, but Shakespeare shows us his human side.

5. King Lear (King Lear) – Is dying the worst thing that can happen? What about having it all and watching it fade?

4. Prince Hal/ Henry the Fifth (Multiple plays) – Shakespeare traces England’s great hero from his wayward youth to his victory in France.

3. Lady Macbeth (Macbeth) – An equal partner in evil to Macbeth, and a force to be reckoned with. But then she breaks.

2. The Fool (King Lear) – The Fool balances that fine line between jesting clown, and sharp commentator on events.

1. Iago (Othello) – The hands-down, pure evil incarnate, puppet master general. But why does he do it?