Showing posts with label shakespeare. Show all posts
Showing posts with label shakespeare. Show all posts

Wednesday, July 31, 2013

Wolf Hall by Hilary Mantel

This book has opened a door to a new obsession for me: English history. Though this is a novel, it made me look at history with new eyes and be interested in the lives of all those who were its main characters. 

Before I read Wolf Hall I thought Cromwell was basically a villain, an unscrupulous, selfish man that advised the King to get what was in Cromwell’s best interest, not necessarily England’s or even the King’s.  He was the one to blame for the execution of Thomas More and all the bloody deeds Henry VIII carried out in order to get what he wanted. But after reading this book, I was once again reminded that nothing is black and white and that Cromwell was a human being, not a villain from a Disney movie. Mantel portrays him as someone who is indeed manipulative, very smart and opportunistic, but with a sensitive side, the human side, which can also show mercy, generosity and even courage. The same happens with Thomas More, according to Mantel’s point of view he is not the impeccable saint and martyr everyone thinks him to be, he is, just like Cromwell, a flawed man, with virtues and a dark side. It was a refreshing experience to read about them in a complex and complete way.

Thomas Cromwell

I’m not going into specifics about the plot of the book because we all know about Henry’s reign and the successes and failures in Cromwell’s life. The important thing here is the perspective under which we are able to see the protagonists of this complicated period of time, which is an entirely new experience because thanks to Hilary Mantel’s detailed work, they are now colorful human beings, not just dry lines in a history book.

Henry VIII
As I read the novel, all those familiar names and stories came alive before my eyes and made me really think and reflect about the time, and how everything that took place back then has had an impact on us. Events that took place back then changed life for us now and it is an exciting thing to be able to sink into that world with the help of Mantel’s imagination (based on her extensive research and work, this is not one of those books that mixes up the dates and events and changes the outcome of things, it is the imaginative storytelling of what actually happened, she is filling in the voids of the intimate lives and characteristics of everyone involved in these events).

Since I finished reading Wolf Hall I have read two history books about the Tudors: Tudors (The History of England Vol. 2) by Peter Ackroyd and The Wives of Henry the Eighth and the Parts they played in History by Martin Andrew Sharp Hume. I am really interested in reading more about this famous dynasty and I want to focus now a little bit more on Elizabeth I, because it is the perfect context reading for my Shakespeare project. 

Anne Boleyn
I have already ordered Wolf Hall's sequel called Bring Up the Bodies and I can’t wait to read it. Wolf Hall has been a very important book in my reading experience this year because it has set the tone for what I want to read the rest of the year. I want to focus on the parts of history I love and on the context of Shakespeare’s life and works. This second-half of 2013 is going to be very Elizabethan. 

I strongly recommend to the history buffs out there to read Wolf Hall, I’m pretty sure you are going to love it.

Monday, May 6, 2013

May Meme Question for The Classics Club


This is the first time I'm answering the monthly meme question for The Classics Club, even though I have been part of it since January.

This month's question is: 

"Tell us about the classic book(s) you’re reading this month. You can post about what you’re looking forward to reading in May, or post thoughts-in-progress on your current read(s)."

The classic book I'm reading right now is Villette by Charlotte Brontë. I have been wanting to read this book for a long time and I don't know why I didn't read it sooner, although I ask myself the same question with all the books I love.

I have always enjoyed books where the inner life and thoughts of the characters are the most important part of the book, or even when the book is more focused on the development of the character than of the plot. This is that type of book: it is slow-paced but the inner world of the main character, Lucy Snowe, and its development is incredibly rich and very touching. 

Today I learned there is a readalong of Villette hosted by Too Fond. I would have loved to participate but I will probably finish reading it this week and the event starts next week. 

Besides Villette, I'm also making progress with My Shakespeare Project. I'm letting Hamlet rest for a little while and I'm starting with The Tempest this week. 

And that's about it! Have a great week!

Sunday, May 5, 2013

More thoughts on Hamlet


I have decided to let Hamlet rest for a little while and move on to another play, but before doing so, I wanted to write a post summarizing my current interpretation of the play, along with my questions, doubts and conflicting hypothesis.

One of the greatest characteristics about Hamlet and at the same time, the cause for its difficulty and depth, is its uncertainty and ambiguity. Almost all characters and events can be interpreted and understood in different ways. It is a great thing because it offers a wide range of creative possibilities. That’s the reason the performances and adaptations of this play are always so different from each other. I don’t think I’ll ever get tired of seeing new versions of this play: the words might be familiar but I still feel I’m experiencing something new, and I love that.

The problem comes when one tries to analyze the play. I have already accepted that I will never have a final answer to all my questions and that is a good thing but at the same time, kind of annoying. 

In a previous post I wrote a little about Hamlet’s delay in executing his revenge. I thought Hamlet was a very contradictory character because he is constantly delaying and making excuses for executing his plan but at the same time acts impulsively and has no problem in killing other people.

David, a fellow blogger, commented that maybe there is really no delay and that this was not a problem when the play was first performed because people knew it had to have five acts and therefore Hamlet could not kill Claudius early because then there would be no play. And that is true and I’ve read a lot of people agree with this idea. On the other hand, and what may be a problem for this theory, is that Hamlet actually refers to this delay and is tortured by it. At one point, the Ghost actually has to remind Hamlet of the task he has given him:

Ham.     Do you not come your tardy son to chide,
               That, lapsed in time and passion, lets go by
               The important acting of your dread command?
               O, say!

Ghost.   Do not forget. This visitation
              Is but to whet thy almost blunted purpose.

(Act III, Scene IV)

I have realized I tend to believe that there is indeed a delay and a reason behind it. Why? Well, I think it is mainly because of Hamlet’s behavior throughout the play. I feel there is something strange about his demeanor, not only because he is hurting for the obvious reasons, but also because he doesn’t seem to be capable of fulfilling the Ghost’s request until extreme circumstances force him to do so. It is only at the end, when his mother is dead, that he kills Claudius and even then it is a sudden and impulsive action, not a planned one. 

I also asked myself if Hamlet is really crazy (and if that is partly the reason for the delaying of his revenge) or if he just pretends to be, in order to get what he wants, manipulate others or even distance himself from the ones that are trying to help him. I tend to believe the latter. Declaring him crazy is to oversimplify such a complex character. So, in my humble and inexperienced opinion, Hamlet is not crazy because that would be too easy and there wouldn’t be so much debate regarding the true nature of his character. I have read some people think he acts the way he does because he is just too sensitive for the corrupt, manipulative and deceiving world he lives in. Maybe he is delaying his actions because he has to come to terms with them. I don’t think I completely agree with this theory. Hamlet does show from the start certain disdain for the court and a sort of inadequacy in it, but he also shows his ability to be as deceiving and manipulative (and cruel) as the others. He kills Polonius without really knowing who he was attacking and he sends Rosencrantz and Guildenstern to their deaths without problem. And he is misogynistic. Yes, I know that word may be a little strong and we don’t know if he was always like that, but from what we can see in the play, he is definitely prejudiced and violent towards women. He is especially cruel to Ophelia, who is basically the victim of everyone in the play. Therefore, I don’t think he is too “pure” for what is required of him.


Then, why is it he has so much trouble? So far, what I feel most inclined to believe, is that he is having trouble with accepting the reality of his situation. He doesn’t lack the tenacity or courage, if you will, to avenge his father. I think he just can’t face the reality of what is going on. And to be completely honest, I don’t know what bothers him most: the fact that his father was murdered by his uncle or that his mother married him and loves him. I don’t know who he feels most betrayed by and maybe that is also his problem. 

Anyway, I know this subject has been discussed over and over again and I’m not providing something new, I’m just writing my impressions and doubts, but I feel that organizing such thoughts and sharing them is an important part of my experience with this particular play. 

This is not the end of Hamlet for me, I just need to leave it for a while so I can move on with my project and also to be able to come back to it with fresher eyes and maybe a new perspective, just like when I finish translating something and leave it alone for some time before proofreading it; that way it is easier to see things better and clearer.

As always, please feel free to comment, give me your opinion or debate with me. It is all part of the process I very much enjoy.

Monday, February 27, 2012

Mucho Ruido y Pocas Nueces (Much ado about nothing) de William Shakespeare

Cuando pensaba este fin de semana con qué reseña comenzar esta nueva etapa en el blog, hice una lista mental de los últimos libros que había leído últimamente. Y resulta que los dos últimos libros que he leído son: Mucho Ruido y Pocas Nueces y Sueño de Una Noche de Verano, ambas obras de Shakespeare.

Pero reseñar a Shakespeare es una tarea que me intimida un poco. Me parece que para poder hacer una reseña completa de sus obras, la persona que reseña debería tener mucho más conocimiento sobre el teatro isabelino, poesía, el inglés isabelino, etc. así que solo escribiré sobre por qué es que disfruto tanto leyendo las obras de Shakespeare, desde mi punto de vista, estrictamente personal, y comenzaré con Mucho Ruido y Pocas Nueces, que es mi comedia favorita.

Primero, un pequeño resumen de la obra: Leonato, el gobernador de Messina, recibe en su casa a Don Pedro, príncipe de Aragón, y a sus súbditos: Claudio, un joven conde que se enamora de Hero, la hija de Leonato; Benedick, un soldado que jura que jamás se casará y se la pasa discutiendo e intercambiando astutos insultos con Beatrice, la sobrina de Leonato; y Don Juan, el hermano menor e ilegitimo de Don Pedro.
Claudio y Hero se comprometen rápidamente y Benedick y Beatrice son engañados para que dejen de discutir y se enamoren uno del otro.

El principal antagonista es Don Juan, que decide arruinar la felicidad de todos y le pide a su compañero Borachio que haga el amor con la dama de compañía de Hero en la ventana de la habitación de Hero para hacer creer a Claudio y Don Pedro que ella es infiel. Claudio la humilla públicamente el día de la boda y la deja. Leonato, Beatrice y Benedick se rehúsan a aceptar estas acusaciones y deciden hacer creer que Hero ha muerto de pena.

Afortunadamente, Dogberry, el jefe de la policía local, escucha a Borachio jactándose del engaño con sus compañeros y lo arresta. Claudio se ve atormentado por la pena y la culpabilidad de saberse autor de la muerte de Hero. Como castigo, Leonato le pide a Claudio que se encargue de divulgar la inocencia de su hija y que además se case con una sobrina muy parecida a Hero. El día de la boda se descubre que Hero está viva, a lo que todos reaccionan con alegría. Aprovechando el momento de felicidad, Benedick le pide a Beatrice que se case con él y Beatrice acepta, después de discutir un momento.

Mi personaje favorito es Beatrice. Me encanta su fuerza e inteligencia, su discurso astuto y su sentido de independencia. Ella, al igual que Benedick, no es muy fanática del matrimonio. No ha encontrado a un compañero que esté a su altura y se rehúsa a someterse a los caprichos de un esposo controlador. Cuando Leonato aconseja a Hero aceptar una posible propuesta de matrimonio, Beatrice dice: “Yes, faith, it is my cousin’s duty to make courtesy, and say, ‘Father, as it please you’. But yet for all that cousin, let him be a handsome fellow, or else make another courtesy and say, ‘Father, as it please me’.”

Las constantes discusiones con Benedick muestran la naturaleza enérgica de Beatrice y en mi opinión los mejores momentos de la obra son el intercambio de palabras entre ellos:

Beatrice: “(…) I thank God and my cold blood, I am of your humour for that: I had rather hear my dog bark at a crow than a man swear he loves me”.
Benedick: “God keep your ladyship still in that mind! So some gentleman or other shall ‘scape a predestinate scratched face”.

Cuando Claudio calumnia a Hero y la humilla públicamente, Beatrice se encoleriza y lamenta que al ser mujer no tenga permitido enfrentar al agresor: “O that I were a man for his sake! Or that I had any friend would be a man for my sake”.

Benedick es otro de los personajes que disfruto mucho. Su sentido del humor y su personalidad histriónica marcan el ritmo de la obra. Además, es el único personaje masculino fuera de la familia de Leonato que pone en tela de juicio  las acusaciones contra Hero. Incluso llega a retar a un duelo a Claudio después que Beatrice se lo pide. A pesar de ser cínico y hasta cierto punto narcisista, es el único hombre que demuestra honor a la hora de la verdad, lo que es un tema importante a través de la historia.

Se supone que Claudio es el joven apuesto y noble, el príncipe azul, bueno e ingenuo y fácil de engañar. La verdad es que me parece de los personajes menos interesantes, además de que su comportamiento hacia Hero es realmente despreciable. Voy a salirme de mi lenguaje estándar para reseñar y voy a decir que Claudio es un idiota. Es un idiota que se deja engañar, hace el ridículo un buen par de veces, hace lo que se le dice y pareciera que no tiene voluntad propia. Soy consciente que en la época la mayor desgracia para una mujer era ser acusada de no ser virgen o ser infiel, pero no puedo evitar retorcerme un poco cuando Hero lo acepta de vuelta después de que Claudio prácticamente la llamó una prostituta frente a todos. Especialmente porque esta obra incluye uno de los personajes femeninos más fuertes e interesantes entre todas las obras de Shakespeare. Es en este momento cuando uno se da cuenta del contraste que Shakespeare crea entre Hero y Beatrice. La reacción de Hero es desmayarse, en cambio Beatrice dice: “God, that I were a man! I would eat his heart in the market-place.”

El tema principal de la obra es el uso del engaño para poder conseguir algo, ya sea positivo o negativo. Se puede decir que el argumento subyacente en la obra es “el fin justifica los medios”. ¿Cuántos engaños hay en la obra?
  1. Don Pedro corteja a Hero por Claudio. Hero no sabe quién la está corteando porque todos están con máscaras, así que cuando Don Pedro descubre su identidad, tiene que comunicar que la ha cortejado en nombre de Claudio.
  2. Don Juan hace creer a Claudio que Don Pedro ha traicionado a Claudio y ha cortejado a Hero para él mismo.
  3. Leonato, Claudio y Don Pedro conspiran para engañar  a Beatrice y Benedick y hacer que se enamoren.
  4. Don Juan hace creer a Claudio y Don Pedro que Hero es infiel y no es virgen.
  5. Leonato hace creer que su hija ha muerto para salvarla de la humillación.

Esta comedia me gusta tanto por su ágil ritmo, por sacarme carcajadas mientras la leía (Dogberry causó varias de esas carcajadas) y porque reta el orden social de la época. Las mujeres tienen un rol más prominente, no sólo porque Beatrice es un personaje femenino fuerte y fuera de lo común para la época y sus estereotipos con los roles femeninos, sino porque se enfoca en la naturaleza inconstante del hombre con respecto a las mujeres. En Mucho Ruido y Pocas Nueces, son los hombres quienes se equivocan y traman los engaños y enredos, normalmente atribuidos a las mujeres, que finalmente crean toda la confusión del clímax de la obra. Además, también resalta el hecho que los hombres se dejan llevar por los estereotipos del comportamiento femenino y por eso es que Claudio puede aceptar tan fácilmente la idea de que Hero le ha sido infiel. Según mi perspectiva, esta obra resalta la ignorancia de los hombres sobre las mujeres. No estoy generalizando, hay que acordarse del contexto de esta obra. Pero creo que Shakespeare comprendió algo, quizás fugazmente, sobre la naturaleza de ambos sexos y jugó con esos estereotipos para crear una genial comedia de malentendidos.


Como nota aparte, recomiendo la adaptación al cine de 1993 de Kenneth Branagh. Es fiel a la obra original y las actuaciones del mismo Kenneth Branagh como Benedick y Emma Thompson como Beatrice son excepcionales. Lo único un poco inexplicable es Keanu Reeves como Don Juan, pero aparte de él, la película es realmente excelente.