Will We Ever Truly Escape Shakespeare?

8:00 AM - WALLACE 103 - 10/20/2015

The morning was bleak. We were twenty-four hours back from Fall Break, and depression was setting in. Yes, we had three days of "rest and relaxation," but did we really have three more quarters? Some of us mourned the fiesta; others wondered what could be discussed in class now that Brett's promiscuity had been dissected so thoroughly. As usual, chatter filled the air. 

Then Ms. Lemon said that magic word...Shakespeare.

Splitting into groups, we read Act I Scene I of Measure to Measure and discussed the scene's language and content. Ms. Lemon shared with us a behind-the-scenes clip from a New York production of Measure to Measure set in the 1970s, which offered a glimpse into the creative possibilities different directors can explore when adapting such a play. Finally, we read James Richardson's "In Shakespeare," which comments on the truly ridiculous nature of many of Shakespeare's greatest works. Women turn into asses, heroes are tormented by spirits, and men much too hastily marry boys women. Sarcastically, Richardson states, "it's all so realistic/ I can't stand it," (14-15). Lastly, he states his relief that while Shakespeare's characters are often frenzied, naive, and deeply troubled, we the reader are nothing of the sort, never staggering "through an Act that just will not end," (24). We all know that statement is anything but accurate. 

Walking out of the classroom, I only had one question lingering in my mind: can we ever truly escape Shakespeare?

To be honest, I have always been quite a fan. At first, of course, we all must accept the fact that the beloved Elizabethan English must be navigated if we ever hope to understand its content. Luckily for those who are "Shakespearically" challenged, we do not have to read Shakespeare to know Shakespeare. Let me explain....

"To be, or not to be: that is the question."

"All the world's a stage, and all the men and women merely players."

"Romeo, Romero! Wherefore art thou Romeo?"

"Some are born great, some achieve greatness, and some have greatness thrust upon them."

These are among the most commonly recognized lines from Shakespeare (okay - maybe we only know that last one from She's the Man). When we hear these lines, we are aware that Shakespeare is being thrust upon us. However, upon doing a bit of research, Shakespeare is everywhere.

Thanks to our study of Twelfth Night freshman year, many of us are aware that the legendary film She's the Man is based upon Shakespeare's Illyrian shores. The 2001 film O is short for Othello, but you probably already knew that as well. Musical numbers were added and the Capulets and Montagues became the Sharks and Jets in West Side Story, among many other Romeo and Juliet inspired films. William Shakespeare's Taming of the Shrew helped to propel the genre of high school angst comedies in 10 Things I Hate About You. 

Not impressed? Pull up YouTube and read on.

Let's listen to some Eagles: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1H-Y7MAASkg

"Get Over It," the first track off of their 1994 "Hell Freezes Over" album, is about victimization and the need to get over anything that is holding you back without complaining along the way. The second verse contains the lines "The more I think about it, Old Bill was right. Let's kill all the lawyers, kill'em tonight." Don Henley directly quotes a line from Shakespeare's Henry VI. Now you can pull that fun fact out at your next social gathering. 

Not a fan of the Eagles? How about Bob Dylan? In his "Desolation Row," he cites both Romeo and Ophelia, along with other notable fictional characters. In his "Bye and Bye," Dylan states, "I'm not even acquainted with my own desires," a line strikingly similar to that in Act 1, Scene 3 of As You Like It.

Finally, no playlist is complete without the Beatles: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7r52ZBx0KMI

While producing the "I Am the Walrus" fadeout, one of the Beatles turned on the radio in the recording studio, only to catch a broadcast of King Lear. Listen to the song, and then listen to the outro. "Oh untimely death..." is one of the most distinguishable lines, but much more of the dialogue from Oswald's death scene can be heard when listening closely.

I will not begin to discuss the multiple allusions to Shakespeare woven into so many different Disney classics. Hint: look up The Lion King and The Nightmare Before Christmas. Hamlet is everywhere! I do wonder, however, what it is about Shakespearean storylines that seem to permeate throughout our minds. With so little time and so many words, why would songwriters choose those of Shakespeare for their masterpieces? Why take the time to reimagine a 16th century story when a film producer could simply create his or her own? With only eight short semesters worth of high school English, why take the time to read so many works of
Mr. William Shakespeare? 

Ms. Lemon...your move. 

Why Read This?

Over the past week, many of us have been feeling a sense of dissatisfaction with regard to the ending of The Sun Also Rises. During class we expressed how we took the time out of our busy schedules to discover a little more about each of the characters, all the while hoping that reading about their faults and imperfections would be worth our while. Surely these people will change. Surely Jake will rid himself of his pointless attachment to Brett!

Well… we were wrong. But instead of feeling cheated and betrayed, we should look back and ask some important questions. Why read this novel? What have we gained from flipping its pages?

First of all, we need to realize that all novels aren’t written with the purpose of pleasing the reader. The Sun Also Rises is an example of such a novel, and in this way it becomes more realistic. A novel written in the post-war era isn’t going to be filled with happy endings, because during that time happy endings were few and far between.

With this in mind, we should also acknowledge that the concept of life being a “cycle” might be more relatable than it seems. With college on our minds and uncertainty in our hearts, we might feel like a path has already been laid out for us, and that no matter what we do to free ourselves, we will still end up in the exact same place. We don’t have to lose track of time in a repetitive lifestyle. If we chose, we can have different fates than the characters  in Hemingway’s novel.

Hemingway definitely didn’t write this novel without a purpose, and as we know from his writing style, there is more beneath the surface. Sure, the characters had little (if any) development by the end, but instead of feeling like we wasted our time, let’s take a minute to think about what exactly Hemingway was trying to evoke within us.

The Ending as told by The Office

So, we finished the novel.




And let's just say there's a bittersweet feeling in the air. In class, we discussed our feelings about the final scenes of the novel.. and, well... most of us just sort of felt like...


Predicatble.

As soon as we thought everything was over with, Brett comes in the picture and brings us all back to square one. Some people just never learn their lesson. Brett tends to keep in the habit of luring Jake into her trap of "I love you, but I don't want to be with you. Instead I want to be with all the wrong people and then end up breaking all their hearts and expect you to comfort me when it all falls apart."

Jake should feel this way:


But instead, he does the same ol' Jake routine and comes to Brett's beck and call. Which... induced a simultaneous groan from the class.



What are you thinking, Jake?

On the other hand, we came to an agreement that Jake is aware that he keeps comforting Brett through her many unsavory adventures with men. After receiving her message, Jake knew the situation before he even visited her. Jake thought to himself, "That was it. Send a girl off with one man. Introduce her to another to go off with him. Now go and bring her back. And sign the wire with love. That was it all right" (Hemingway 243). Jake has a moment of realization that he is being used over and over, yet he still returns to her. He sees her, she claims she is miserable, he comforts... what's new?

The class came to an agreement that the ending was just the beginning all over again.


After all we've been through...

Remember the scene at the beginning of the novel when Brett and Jake get into the taxi after going out dancing? Brett says once they climb in the cab, "Oh, darling, I've been so miserable" (Hemingway 32). Brett is always miserable. That is a common theme in this novel. She sulks in her misery after dancing and she is miserable at the end of the novel when she parts ways with Romero. Oh, but look! Here comes Jake to her rescue. He is there for her when she's in the cab, kissing all over that woman. Then, in the last scene, he lets her snuggle up as she wallows in self pity once more. What a mess.

The role of women is an interesting topic in this novel, which we discussed briefly in class. The femininity in this novel lacks overall. When Brett is first described by Jake, she had all the characteristics of a man. Jake notes, "Brett was damned good-looking. She wore a slipover jersey sweater and a tweed skirt, and her hair was brushed back like a boy's" (Hemingway 30). They later described her as being "handsome" as opposed to pretty, dainty, or fair. In fact, Pedro did not appreciate Brett's masculinity and even tried to make her a more suitable woman. He would've even married her, of course, on the condition that she become more womanly. She simply could not fit that role. We even realized that the names of all the female characters in this novel could have doubled as boy names.



 I mean, think about it. There's Brett, Georgette, Edna, and Frances, otherwise known as Brett, George, Ed, and Frank.



Hemingway uses the theme of masculinity throughout the novel, even in the role of women.

 Where do we go from here? What do we do with our lives now? Although the sun does rise, it also sets...

Isn't it pretty to think so?

Oh, Responsibility

        Today we started off class with high emotions. Yes, I am talking about the senior house being taken away and the general outrage it has stirred up in the class of 2016. So we were given the poem “Responsibility” which some say was a ‘coincidence,’ but I’m sure was carefully selected by Ms. Lemon just for our mood.

        Responsibility. What does that word even mean? According to Google, responsibility is the state or fact of having a duty to deal with something or having control over someone, the state or fact of being accountable or to blame for something, and the opportunity or ability to act independently and make decisions without authorization. Oh, how ironic the definition of responsibility seems now. The speaker in this poem talks about the role and responsibilities of a poet.  She writes about how poets need to speak the truth about both the beautiful and the ugly. A reoccurring responsibility is, “It is the responsibility for the poet to be a woman.” I thought this was interesting because she mentions it in the second line, in the thirteenth and fourteenth line saying both males and females need to be women, and in the thirtieth line. I really liked how she said, “it is the responsibility of the male poet to be a woman,” but I was expecting her to follow up with a line like “it is the responsibility of the female poet to be a man.” It was then surprising that she continued with the theme of a woman being a woman. It makes me wonder, who is she speaking to?  Is she writing to herself as a reminder of her responsibilities as a poet? Or is she writing to other women to stay true to themselves and not try to be like men? I still can’t decide on the answer to these questions, but I suppose these responsibilities are supposed to be taken in a way that is most beneficial to the reader.      

        That may be why that, after reading this poem, we were given the assignment of writing our own “Responsibility” poems in this same style. I think the majority of people’s minds went to the before mentioned topic of outrage. However small this may be in the grand scheme of things, my mind went right there too. But it also went to a more recent event of two flies that we saw the dramatic deaths of. So, even though this is by far not my best piece of writing, I thought I would share my “Responsibility” poem.

Responsibility

It is the responsibility of the fly to be a fly

It is the responsibility for the fly to

come into peaceful classrooms

and create chaos where there was none

It is the responsibility of the fly to

find that one banana

and punish the room with its buzzing

It is the responsibility of the fly to

stir up a crowd

even if they believe in its right to live too

It is the responsibility of the fly

to bond people in anger

and not in love

It is the responsibility of the fly

to evade capture

And it is the responsibility of the people

to just let it go.

The Necessity of Faults

How is it possible that there's only one solidly good character in this whole novel? Cohn is a whiner, Mike is a drunk, Jake can be a jerk, Bill is jaded sometimes, and Brett is the worst. Thank goodness for the existence of Pedro Romero, because otherwise, I'm not sure we'd find a completely likeable character. Even Jake, as the narrator, admits to some of his faults, particularly his horrid jealousy of Cohn. Then, there's Romero, the dashing young bull-fighter. Is there anything "wrong" with him? Not that we know of at the moment. He's mature for his age, an incredible bull-fighter, he's proficient in English and French as well as Spanish, and he's an all-around nice guy. At this point, the only potential problem with him is that he's interested in Brett, which spells trouble.

Meanwhile, there's every other character. Let's start with our narrator, Jake. He puts himself in a good light, but we can still see hints of his flaws. He's very judgmental and doesn't stop other people from slamming Cohn since he doesn't particularly like Cohn. Jake doesn't try to hide his issues, but he isn't confronting them, either. I see Jake as a coward. He loves Brett, and even though he knows she's destructive bad news, he doesn't try to sever ties with her. He's too afraid to be without her, but he can't be with her. He would be better off if he could face his problems head-on.

I'll say the same for Mike: he's a coward. He becomes falsely brave when he's drunk--a.k.a. all the time--and that's when he chooses to confront Cohn. But he confronts Cohn for these issues. Only Cohn. Never Brett, because God forbid she do anything wrong. I mean, Mike even mentions that Brett has affairs all the time, yet he's still going to marry her! Like Jake, he's too scared to leave her.

Cohn needs to get over himself. So he spent some time in San Sebastian with Brett. So has probably the majority of male Europe. That doesn't make him super special. He published a book that was popular in America? Congratulations, but he's in France! He isn't a big deal there! He seems very whiny to me, especially when talking about the bull-fights, a huge contrast to Romero. First, he's afraid he might be bored, then he's feeling sick at the sight of dying animals. I'm sure he's a nice guy when he's not being terribly annoying, but I'm finding it hard to see too many redeeming qualities at the moment. But I should keep in mind that our narrator is Jake, who isn't so happy with Cohn, so there's obviously some bias abounding.

Bill is generally a light-hearted guy, but on occasions, he lashes out. He's pretty jaded, especially with his snarky comments about Cohn and the Catholic pilgrims. Did the war make him like this? Maybe he's born with it. Maybe it's Maybelline. He's hardly in the chapters post-fishing, though, so we don't get to see a lot more of his bitter side.

Then there's Brett. Ah, flirtatious, insincere, self-destructive Brett. Everyone is a phase to her. Cohn, Mike, Romero, even Jake, although their relationship doesn't fade super quickly. Her flaws are more noticeable than others. It's like there's an air horn directing our attention to her faults. She's engaged (and still somewhat married, if there is such a thing), yet she still has affairs with pretty much every man she meets, and doesn't even try to hide it from her fiancée. How cold-hearted and ridiculous is that? If I had a moral compass that didn't quite point North, I wonder if I would like Brett more, since Jake still paints her in a flattering light. I guess love really does see not with the eyes but with the mind.

It's hard to argue that there is a character besides Pedro Romero that has no faults. On the other hand, if everyone was as perfect as Romero, the book would be totally boring. Brett would stick with Mike or Jake, there would be no conflict, and it would be nearly impossible to differentiate the characters. Without problems, what is the plot? What are we? I guess I should thank Hemingway for making his characters less than perfect. It makes for an interesting tale.

Nature's Role in "The Sun Also Rises"

          In class, part of what we discussed was how Hemingway uses nature in the The Sun Also Rises. After sharing Quaker style the different nature-specific passages that stuck out to us throughout chapters eleven, twelve, and thirteen, it was clear that nature is a large part of the message that Hemingway is trying to send in the novel. Similar to "Hills like White Elephants", nature serves a greater purpose than a simple description. Hemingway's inclusion of nature may provide hints as to the characters' innermost thoughts and desires or possibly what the reader should take away from the novel.
          Nature plays a key role in chapter twelve. Jake and Bill's fishing trip brought to the two characters to an almost alternate reality. In the passage below, Hemingway describes Jake's experience when he first starts fishing:
          "As I baited up, a trout shot up out of the white water into the falls and was carried down. Before I could finish baiting, another trout jumped at the falls, making the same lovely arc and disappearing into the water that was thundering down. I put on a good size sinker and dropped into the white water close to the edge of the timbers of the dam" (Hemingway, 124).


          Before the fishing trip, the entire novel takes place in cities and involves wild, city lifestyles. When the two friends escape from this possibly harmful way of life and take refuge in the warm air and beautiful water, Jake especially seems to be reborn. I think that this is a turning point for him as a character. He does not have Brett to be distracted by and has no alcohol to numb his feelings. Instead, he and Bill have a "bromance" moment and Jake finally seems temporarily happy. He even uses the word, "lovely". Who is this? Jake is characteristically cynical and suddenly he is using words like "lovely". It seems like nature represents life in the novel because it helps Jake to truly live again.  Unfortunately, Jake's character is one who is not living completely. He is stuck in a rut before and after the fishing trip. Jake is basically along for the ride and pines after Brett from afar. He is obviously in love with her but does nothing because he feels that he is insufficient. In this way, he is letting life pass him by. In contrast, this passage is a sort of recess for Jake's angst and I think that Hemingway wanted for the reader to realize the way that nature temporarily heals Jake.

I know how to lose stuff, too

Today in class, we talked about The Sun Also Rises, but we also talked about the poem "One Art" by Elizabeth Bishop. After reading this poem, I looked around to see grins on my classmate's and even Ms. Lemon's faces, yet I couldn't help being surprised at this sight. I do agree it's a well-written poem, but it's not one that leaves me smiling. It's heart-breaking. It's beautiful. It's deeper than it first seems.

Bishop starts her poem by talking of losing things of little value and how it is not a disaster but is even to be expected. Yet as the poem goes on, the things she loses become larger thing, more sentimental, a bigger deal, arguably a disaster. Bishop writes of losing "places, and names, and where it was you meant / to travel" (Bishop 8-9). These are dreams she's losing. Dreams. Maybe it's just that I'm a senior and preparing to enter into that last stage before *cringe* adulthood. Maybe it's because we're hyper-sensitive at this time to find our passion and pursue it. Maybe it's because I've seen too many adults living their life in a job that's merely that: a job. It breaks my heart that this narrator has lost the places she dreamed of going, the people who meant so much to her at one time. Then she loses her mother's watch. It's unclear if her mother is alive or not. But upon hearing this line, I imagined it as the gift her mother had given her. It probably has tremendous value, especially if her mother has died. Then she writes of losing houses, cities, rivers, and a continent. If you have ever had to move, you know what a cause of stress it becomes. Perhaps she's been evicted, but even if she's moving of her own volition moving is stressful.

Then comes the biggest shift in the poem. She has lost "you."  I don't know who "you" is, but it's very clear to me that "you" was loved and "you" was important. It's so clear. The narrator describes "the joking voice, a gesture" (16). These are small things you only know on best friends or someone you're in love with. Yet how does Bishop end the poem? By saying that losing things is easy and saying it's not a disaster. I only agree with one of those statements.

How many times have I sent a text spilling my vulnerabilities and feelings only to end it with "haha", "LOL", or "or whatever"? Isn't that what Bishop is doing here? Only instead of an "or whatever," Bishop adds that nothing is a disaster to almost every stanza. Ms. Lemon so beautifully described the works from the confessionalist movement as "their lives were splattered all over the pages." And that is what's happening in the poem. Bishop opens up the gate guarding her house, yet bolts the door. She brings us in, and keeps us out.

So, Miss Elizabeth Bishop, I feel you. Girl, do I get it. Many times I've lost things, places, and people. But, let me tell you, it is ok for it to be a disaster. In the words of Victoria Erickson, "it's ok to shatter. You can't possibly hold more light or beauty unless you break first." So yeah, losing things may be inevitable. But you don't have to shove your distress down and try and convince yourself and everyone else that it doesn't matter. It's ok for it to be a disaster.