This class has ruined me for theater. There, I said it. Seriously though, before this semester I was just a naive girl who went to plays to hear a nice story. Now I analyze stage design and creative intent.

Last Saturday my Dad was still in town for Thanksgiving so we went with my aunt and uncle(who live in American Fork) to the LDS Conference Center Theater to watch Savior of the World. Many of you have probably seen it before, but I hadn't, so I'll give a quick summary. It was about Christ(obviously), so it worked really well as a Christmas message, but I thought it was really unique because it focused more on the events before and after Christ's life and on all the miracles and people of great faith that had to be strong for things to turn out the way they did. It opened with Zacharias and Elizabeth wishing for a child and the opportunity for Zacharias to burn the incense in the temple, then they showed Mary just before she was betrothed to Joseph. The play followed the story lines of those two couples throughout the first act, which ended with the shepherds visiting at the birth of Christ. After intermission, the second act opened with the stone being rolled in front of Christ's tomb and followed the story of the apostles and Mary Magdeline encountering the resurrected Christ and Thomas' struggle with faith when Christ does not immediately appear unto him. The play ended with the apostles promising to "feed my sheep" and running off to preach, as well as with a song.

While it was different for me to find myself thinking critically for a play that wasn't in Shakespearean, biblical language can be almost as foreign at times. But I did notice some really neat things that I don't think I would have if I weren't in this class. Firstly, the set was really amazing, and played well with the division between heaven and earth and how the two interact. The lower level had different arches and entryways that could be used to make the set feel like lots of different rooms or one big marketplace, and the floor had different sections which could rise and change, and even open to reveal a rocky peak, that made it really diverse. The upper level was like a bridge between heaven and earth, where any number of angels stood watching. Behind all of it was a backdrop of the sky which could change from night to day and even showed the new star at Christ's birth. I particularly enjoyed watching how many angels there were at any given point during the play. They would quietly come and go, some standing, some sitting. There would be sitting angels in odd numbers, always, because (I learned in a drawing class once) odd amounts of things are more visually pleasing. Whenever an angel came down to appear to someone on earth, they would go down a staircase in the back(that I probably wasn't supposed to be able to see) and come through one of the arches, then be struck with a bright white spotlight. I thought the way the did it all was really neat. The angel Gabriel spent a lot of time at the center of the upper level watching over Mary and Joseph, and later the apostles. It seemed like they were suggesting God always watching over us in the form of having angels overhead. Another thing was the amount of angels present at different points in the story. As you can see from the pictures, at Christs birth there are at least thirty of them and by the end of the play there are none. The theme I pulled from that was that heaven was very involved in the events surrounding Christs life, but now that he is gone we have to rely on his teachings and our own faith, rather than having everything given to us.

The other neat thing that I wanted to talk about was the portrayal of Christ. They never once showed his face. In the first act he doesn't appear except as a baby doll. In the second he is sometimes a voice from nowhere while the actors seem to see him, and sometimes a figure in all white with a hood up and his back to the audience. It was a weird way to portray Christ in a play that focused on him, but once I got used to it I really liked it. It put the focus less on Christ as an awe inspiring being(which he is, of course) and helped me to realize the amazing people and great trials of faith that happened surrounding his life. It helped me see how brave and faithful Mary was, and what a genuinely good person Joseph was for accepting and loving her still. It helped me to sympathize with Thomas' frustration and applaud Mary Magdeline and Peter for their leadership and courage. And, ultimately, all of their stories come back to Christ and their faith in him as their Savior. So, without once trying to interpret the character of Christ, Savior of the World taught me so much about who he is and the effect he has on people's lives.

I'm sorry this isn't very Shakespeare related, it's just what I really felt like writing about. And it seemed relevant at least in the sense that I wouldn't have loved this play so much if I weren't involved in this class. I'll be sure to post about the gruesome and bloody, non-uplifting King Lear in my next post this week.:)

I think Shakespeare was a fan of Greek writings. Oedipus the King in particular. I posted earlier in the semester about parallels between Oedipus and Perdita from Winter's Tale, and the recent blinding of Gloucester in King Lear brought my mind back to Sophocles' masterpiece. A lot of really interesting parallels can be drawn between Gloucester and Oedipus.
Although Oedipus blinds himself out of shame and Gloucester is blinded by an enemy, both find that they see better without their eyes. Gloucester reflects on the uselessness of eyes when he says, "I have no way and therefore want no eyes; I stumbled when I saw." Similarly, the blind prophet Teiresias declared to Oedipus, "thou hast eyes, yet see'st not in what misery thou art fallen, nor where thou dwellest nor with whom for mate." It is interesting that until Gloucester looses his eyes he does not realize that he has been mislead and mistreated his son, Edgar; and, upon realizing that he has killed his father and married his mother, Oedipus promptly blinds himself and his eyes become opened to the true horror of what he has done. Losing physical sight equals finding moral insight. Perhaps the message is that we can't truly look inward and find our faults until we stop focusing on everything else going on around us. Once Gloucester and Oedipus loose their sense of sight, they have nowhere to look but inside and at their own faults.
Another parallel between the two characters is their children. Antigone is faithful to Oedipus, her father, and wanders with him after he blinds himself. Edgar, likewise, is faithful to his father and leads him, though somewhat connivingly, when Gloucester cannot see for himself. Edgar even saves his father's life my not allowing him to jump off a cliff. The interesting thing about these faithful children is that both have been wronged by their father, but are still faithful to him. Antigone is the daughter of a messed up, incestuos marriage, and only days before Gloucester was sending hunting parties to kill Edgar. This is also seen in the Cordelia, who loves her father, Lear, even after he disowns and banishes her. Lear, as a foil of Gloucester, can be seen as metaphorically blind to the manipulations of his less loyal children. All three of these "blind" men needed exceptional circumstances to make them change their ways, and were fortunate enough to have children who could help them see the light. The fact that none of these faithful children had to loose their eyes to find a respectful, honorable way of life is comforting. Perhaps if we look inside ourselves and strive for a recognition of good before we have reached rock bottom we can avoid losing sight in a gruesome and bloody way.


Just a side note, I learned in my World Civilization class a few weeks ago that Roman actors, when portraying Oedipus the King, were actually expected to gouge their own eyes out on stage. Just makes me thankful to live in a slightly less bloodthirsty culture today.

So, as a Production Group, we had our first read through of a very premature script on Friday. Can I just say? It was a blast! I'm so excited for this group! Though not quite as excited as Averill always seems to be.:) Here's a look at Eric reading some of Hamlet's lines. Quite dramatically. Sorry for the terrible quality, as it was done with a phone. And make sure to turn the sound all the way up!

I'm also going to try to get this up on our group blog, so check it out!

Since we just got the group blog set up today, I'm sure no one is paying much attention to it yet. But I did throw up a quick researching post. So go check it out.
http://loveslabours232.blogspot.com/

Yay! The start of another tragedy! I can't wait to get attached to these characters only to have them all die! If you'd like a summary of King Lear so far... Google it. Here's what I got from Act 1:

"Come not between a dragon and his wrath."(1.1.120)
"Sure her offense/Must be of such unnatural degree/That monsters it"(1.1.237)
"He cannot be such a monster"(1.2.421)
"More hideous when thou show'st thee in a child/ Than the sea monster"(1.4.785)
"Monster ingratitude!"(1.5.913)

I'm sensing a motif... Maybe Shakespeare thinks there's a little monster inside all of us. King Lear's might be a bit bigger than everyone else's. Although Gonerill and Regan are seeming pretty monstrous as well. Let's be on the lookout for who's inner monster gets the best of them, and who can overcome.

So I wanted to talk about the two plays I saw this weekend, Macbeth and The Tempest. Cassandra and Averill already covered the Grassroots Shakespeare Company production of Macbeth pretty well, and Averill compared it to The Tempest. So I figured I would share my personal experience and what it taught me, more than differences in the productions themselves.

First off, I loved Macbeth. I actually went twice, the second time because I told my roommate about it and she wanted to go. The inter-activeness of the play really brought it to life. I didn't even mind that it was freezing and I stood for 2 hours. The second time I cheated a little bit, because I knew what would happen, and stood right in the center of the groundling area against the stage(the spot where the actors messed with the groundlings the most). I'm really glad I got to go twice, it was a completely different play because there was a different crowd. And the second time(on closing night) they even brought out the "Queen of England" to try to please her with their performance. Lines that I thought were scripted turned out to be the actors playing off the audience, and times when I thought the actor was making a side joke and messing with the audience turned out to be actual lines. I could see that the actors were really having fun with it. And they were awesome at reacting to whatever the groundlings threw at them. Literally, the girl next to me threw a piece of bread at Macbeth... And he ate it.

Going to see the Tempest at the Pioneer Theater was a completely different experience. Not better or worse, just different. The stage felt so disconnected and far away(because it was). And the actors seemed like they were pretending the audience wasn't there. If anything had happened in the audience, I get the feeling the actors would have just plowed on and pretended nothing happened. It felt like I was observing events through a window, rather than being a part of them. Of course there's nothing wrong with a serious, formal play, but after being yelled at and spit on the night before, I had a hard time staying awake in a dark room with the stage a football field away.

Both productions were extremely well done and did what they intended to do. I just tend to lean towards the informal, Shakespearean way of doing things: "Let's throw stuff at the groundlings and get people involved." After all, we learn from doing, not seeing. For example, my war cry improved tenfold this weekend.

A. Learning Outcomes:

1. How have I gained Shakespeare literacy?
   The breadth of my Shakespeare literacy has increased quite a bit since the beginning of this semester. Of the five plays that I have studied so far(four with the class and one individually), I had only read one of them before, and I had never even heard of some of them. Now I have a general knowledge of the plot and major themes of Hamlet, Winter's Tale, Love's Labor's Lost, The Tempest, and The Merchant of Venice. I have also found that I have greater depth in my understanding of Shakespeare. I am completely comfortable with the language now, and have had a lot of fun digging deeper into the text and applying theme's to my own life. I also experienced going to my first Shakespeare production this semester. I have now been to four total(three if you don't count going to Macbeth twice) and am excited to see more throughout my life. I've learned a lot about the different media Shakespeare can be shared in, such as film vs. theatre, and the emotions and messages that can be in portrayed through different methods. I also spent time viewing the movie for The Merchant of Venice and am excited for the day when I get to do the same for The Tempest.
2. How have I analyzed Shakespeare critically?
   I have actually spent a good amount of time analyzing Shakespeare's text critically. It's my favorite kind of blog post, because it's the most straightforward. Earlier in the semester I talked about possible ulterior motives of Gertrude, criticized contradictions between plays and reality, compared Winter's Tale to Greek mythology, and explored the use of costume in staging a production. I also analyzed a passage of Love's Labor's Lost and compared the relationships to those of Much Ado About Nothing. More recently, I looked at several sections of The Tempest and talked about the role of ambition in decision making. I also spent a lot of time critically analyzing my individual play and a production of it and going back and forth on the idea of Shylock as a victim or villain.
3. How have I engaged Shakespeare creatively?
   I am planning on fulfilling this learning objective much more than I already have through the final project. This focus is the hardest for me, because I tend to spend more time listening and observing, and less time actually doing. I really admire people who are super creative, but I've always had a hard time with it. However, I am trying to be better! Just recently I did a blog post where I explored possible staging and costuming in The Tempest before we went to see the production. I talked about one particular scene, the feast, and how I thought it could be staged and the need for creative costumes. Unfortunately, a lot of what I had hoped to see was cut from the production we went to.
4. How have I shared Shakespeare meaningfully?
   Sharing Shakespeare meaningfully was a huge part of the individual play assignment, and I feel like I fulfilled the objectives pretty well. I shared in the community by asking people to fill out a short survey and attempting to discuss the answers with them, and I shared globally by chiming in on a Boston cycling blog about the Merchant of Venice's theme of tolerance. I also had a neat sharing experience this last weekend with the Grassroots Shakespeare Company production of Macbeth. I went to see it Friday night with some of my classmates and was so excited about it when I got back to my apartment and talked to my roommate that I ended up taking my roommate and her friend back on Monday. I thought it was really neat that my enthusiasm transferred over to my roommate and just by being excited about what I had seen, it prompted her to want to go. It was a blast going back a second time and seeing her reactions. (She loved it, by the way.)

B. Self-directed Learning

• I tend to learn best in very structured settings with clear purposes and steps to reach a goal. So some of my self-directed learning has been creating that organization for myself in a class that is not quite so rigid. As part of that, I have stuck very closely to the blogging schedule and the days that I chose to post on. I have also made sure to always do the assigned readings before class. I like to mark in my copy of the play when I come across interesting lines or as I am noticing motifs. That way, when I am looking for blogging ideas I can flip through the text and revisit the things that interested me. Originally a lot of my self-directed learning through blogging was done with a "what can I blog about today to get this assignment done" attitude. But lately I have been thinking, reading, and watching Shakespeare more in terms of sharing, and in a day I now think of more ideas to write about then I will ever have the time or means for. Now the "what am I going to blog about today?" question is more one of narrowing down choices than searching for them. These days I am excited to learn and to share, and I feel like that's a good sign.

C. Collaborative and Social Learning

• I am really enjoying working and talking with my learning group in class and through the internet. It's really nice to have the group of people I share ideas with in class be the same ones who read my posts later, when the thoughts are more fully formed. I also really enjoy watching my group members' thoughts grow and expand. The only issue I have with the group learning has been with these last few weeks. More of the posting has been to fulfill individual assignments and it has been harder to meaningfully comment on posts about plays and productions that I am not familiar with. I feel like the blogging groups work better when we blog about the plays we all read. I am more comfortable with social collaborating of ideas through blogs than I am with trying to understand something I'm not familiar with. Having said that, my group members have done a fantastic job. I feel like we are all doing well with making informed and constructive comments. I learn a lot from their opinions and view points that they share on my posts. I have also been learning from my interactions. Within class that interaction comes mostly from group discussion and comments people in other groups make. Outside of class I have found myself applying Shakespeare to the world. When I see couples now I wonder if they are "Perdita and Florizel couple" or a "Beatrice and Benedick couple." (At BYU the first is probably more common.)

D. Looking Ahead

• With the remainder of the semester, I hope to be as familiar with King Lear as I have been with the past plays we studied, if not more so. I am going to keep up with my scheduled reading and posting and maybe do some more sporadic posting as I think of things to share, rather than only when I'm scheduled. I'm also hoping to put a lot more work into engaging Shakespeare creatively, and I feel like I'll be able to accomplish that with the final project. I am planning on joining Averill in her production. I think it will be a really good learning experience for me. I have always been on the audience side of the stage and am excited to get up there and experience Shakespeare from a performer's point of view.