The Final One!

-----------
Note: I will put the movie worksheet here on Friday, after we have finished watching Othello in class.
-----------

This is my final blog for this class. It is a bittersweet moment. My reflection of this class is one of similar sentiments, bittersweet. I am a Computer Science major, so taking a 400 level English class was a decision that set out from the beginning to challenge me, and in fact my friends and family laughed at me. Why would I put myself through that if I didn't have too. I do a slight bias, because my girlfriend is also taking the class, but that aside, I have a personal goal of being a renaissance man. I think a good college education should be fairly liberal, and provide a lot more than just the technical nuts and bolts you need for your career. I hate people who cover themselves with science, but have no idea about philosophy. They are ignorant people. I want my engineers to be political, well read, people. You may have the equations and techniques to understand the workings of an atom, but if you do not have a well developed sense of historical right and wrong, you will end up building an atomic bomb when you meant to solve the world energy crisis, and you won't understand the difference. Even if you do purposely build that bomb, or something analogous, you should at least have a good enough philosophical background to reflect on it, and good enough communication skills to reflect your ideas in the context of the world in which you live. I believe philosophy is as important as science. Which is why I took this class. Shakespeare has had a immeasurable effect on modern society, this is something that is worth understanding because of that alone.

As far as the technical aspects of this class go, there were a lot of good things. This blog in itself is a brilliant idea that shows how forward thinking Professor McCall is. It is a brilliant way to bring the concept of journal writing into a modern context, and it saves trees! The concept of a blog also makes the journal writing seem a bit more hip and modern, which makes them more accessible to motivate the lazier students :-P.

The idea of graphic novels, and the "low brow" approach to Shakespeare is also brilliant. I love how it brings the plays into different contexts, and really shows the power of interpretation. Dr. McCall has stated that you do not need to ever read Shakespeare, and you will be just fine in your life. I agree with this, but the deeper understanding of Shakespeare really gives a valuable understanding to how society interprets things, and what things are worth interpreting, which I think makes me a better person. It may not have been necessary, but it was worth it, albeit challenging for me at times.

I always try to make sure I am a decent writer, and I hope that you can at least say that I have that going for myself, but I have never had to write papers of this magnitude before, or this frequency, so it was definitely a challenge for me. It was worth it though; I did enjoy the challenge, and I think it made me a better writer. I would like to make two small critique's about the amount of work though. These are just my opinion, and feel free to ignore me, or flog me :-P. The first is the large amount of blog posts, and their regularity, even in the face of approaching large papers due. A blog post and a paper due on the same day is brutal. The second critique is the paper lengths. We started with a five page paper, then went to a six page paper, then jumped all the way to ten pages. That is a huge jump, especially during the compressed schedule of a five week summer session. The average of all those essays comes out to be seven pages per paper on average, but the unequal distribution, makes it seem very intimidating. Admittedly the last paper was ultimately creative, so that does make up for the length increase, but it was still scary.

Overall, I enjoyed the class thoroughly, and I think it was a worthwhile endeavor. I only regret that we didn't get to play Dungeons and Dragons :-P.

Thank you,
Ray Imber

Fan Fiction Prewrite

My fan fiction has gone through a bit of a tumultuous start. I had the conception that I could produce a ten page graphic novel of a professional quality in about a week. As I did some tests I found out that this was not going to be feasible, I am neither proficient enough, nor fast enough of an artist to achieve that goal. This was quite a bit of a disappointment to me, not only because I have a certain level of craftsmanship I expect out of myself, but also because my experimentation cost me a lot of the little time I had to complete the project. This is quite unfortunate, but alas, the show must go on, and I am left to fall back on good old prose writing.

The story itself is a bit more interesting. At one point I had the fleeting idea of putting Lady Macbeth on trial for baby killing, which would mirror the Casey Anthony case that currently has so much fervor in the news, but I don't follow the news closely enough, so I scratched that idea (though I still think it is a good idea). My second idea is just as interesting though. I had always found the witches to be one of the most interesting parts of Macbeth, and they serve a very powerful role as a plot device in the play, yet as characters, they were essentially shallow secondary characters. Except for Act I, Scene 3, when the witches talk about cursing the sailor, we don't get much about their personalities or back story. I wanted to expand on this void. 

One of the interesting things about the witches is not even the witches themselves, but that they seem to answer directly to Hecate, the goddess of witchcraft. This gave me an interesting idea: what if Hecate was like Emperor Palpatine, and the witches were Darth Vader. Each witch could have been a good and powerful character who is twisted by Hecate into becoming evil. This could be made even more interesting if the three witches were lead female characters in other Shakespearean plays, and each one is in Macbeth because each one is repaying their "deal with the devil". Which female leads would work best for this purpose?

Ophelia went mad and drowned herself. Perhaps during her drowning, Hecate appeared to her and offered her revenge on Hamlet, in return for the soul she was about to forfeit anyway. Desdemona was a loyal and loving wife to Othello, but Iago's manipulations blinded Othello into an unstoppable spiral of death. What if Hecate appeared to Desdemona right before Othello came in to smother her, and promised to restore her husbands faith......though she may not live to see it. Regan was the middle daughter of Lear, and always felt misplaced because of it. She loved her sister, but she also knew that Goneril will stop at nothing to steal her beloved Edmond. Perhaps before she went to see Goneril for the last time, she was approached by Hecate, who promised that no woman would be able to steal Edmond's affections, not even her sister, but Hecate may require the favor of the princess in return.

Hecate never lies to any of these women, all of her promises and predictions come true. But she manipulates them all in much the same way that they must manipulate Macbeth. Even if all of the women do not agree with Hecate, they are bound by her magic to obey her rules. Each woman is tempted in their darkest hour and played against their own emotions. Each woman starts out beautiful, but they are inevitably twisted by Hecate's magic, first emotionally, and then physically, until they become as they appear in Macbeth. And there I present the origin of the "Witches of Dunsinane Hill".

Kill Shakespeare -- Extra Credit Blog 2

I really enjoyed Kill Shakespeare. It was a clever use of the characters, though it was a bit cheesy and archetypal in places. I enjoyed the art in much the same way. I love that classic hero comic book look, and it lent it self to the story fairly well. My biggest problem was with Lady Macbeth as a voluptuous vixen. I always saw Lady Macbeth as a Cruella de Vil type character, not a Bond girl. The image threw me off, but it doesn't destroy  the story. There are a few issues I did have with the story though.


First there is Rosencrantz and Guildenstern. They just had a brief cameo in the story, but their characters seemed off to me. In the play, these characters always seemed more loyal to King Claudius than to Hamlet, while in the graphic novel, they seem to be Hamlets unwavering lackeys. There is also the fact that Rosencrantz and Guildenstern were never smart enough, in my opinion, to have opened Claudius's letter themselves. This increase in cunning and loyalty that the authors have imparted upon Rosencrantz and Guildenstern seemed off to me, and it leads me into the next issue I have with the story, Hamlet.


Hamlet is set up from the beginning to be this dashing heroic prince figure who is destined to lead armies into valiant battles. He is drawn as young, attractive, and muscular, but as we discussed in class, Hamlet was a middle aged scholar.  In fact, he is explicitly stated to be less of a swordsman than his kinsman, Laertes. Even the way Rosencrantz and Guildenstern act toward Hamlet in graphic novel immediately set us up to believe he is a strong leader character. The heroic Qualities Hamlet lacks in the play make him seem like a more realistic character. by imbuing these heroic characteristics onto Hamlet, I feel he looses some depth. As the story progresses, Hamlets indecisiveness reduces down to a generic hero quest, with Hamlet simply building up to become the great hero of the story. The original character had for more depth, despite his whining.


The second character I have an interesting issue with, though not as much as Hamlet, is Juliet. Somehow, Juliet went from a depressed, longing, whiny, teenage girl, from a wealthy family, to a rebel leader and  Joan of Arc figure. That is a pretty big leap. At least Princess Leia was set up from the begining to have those characteristics. Juliet, seems to just sort of have them tacked on. Admittedly, the authors were smart enough to make reference to this change, and leave plenty of room to make a back story to make the change believable, but for someone who has previous Shakespeare experience, it seems odd.


All this criticism is not to say I didn't enjoy the graphic novel any less. I do enjoy a good hero quest, and generic archetypal adventure. Comic's by nature are an exaggerative medium, as opposed to a play, which is generally considered a more realistic medium. To this end, Othello was perfectly done. I believed Othello whole heartedly in this universe. He has all of Othello's strongest traits from the the play, a strong warrior, a soft but well spoken statesmen, an exotic gentlemen, but with a huge temper and a hint of savagery. I believe Othello really makes the best translation to comic book form. He has all the right traits, and making him a huge buff black guy on the scale of Michael Clarke Duncan just creates a perfect comic book bad ass.
All in all, I enjoyed the work for what it was. It didn't have the depth of any one of the 
plays, but used the characters (mostly) effectively to create it's own universe that
is entertaining in it's own right.

Summer Storms -- Extra Credit Blog 1

The heaviest storm that we have experienced in Las Vegas in a few years came through today. It was a veritable tempest, albeit a brief one. As the storm raged, I sat out and enjoyed the show put on by the lighting and thunder, and I found my thoughts turning to Lear and his storm, and Nikki Texeira's analysis of the sublime. The experience gave me a more emotional connection to the scene than I had previously had, and it gave more gravity to Lear and his fool for me personally.

Even as I stood under the shelter of a patio awning, I felt little sheltered from the strong winds and sharp rain drops. To imagine that a man would choose to stand, completely uncovered, in such circumstances, is quite compelling. What is even more compelling to me, is that the Fool stayed with Lear. That shows an intense loyalty, and a very interesting aspect of that character. While sitting in my sheltered view of the storm, I tried to imagine the few people that I would stand out in a storm of that magnitude with, and it wasn't a very large list. The Fool does often refer to Lear as "Nuncle" several times in the play, which is an affectionate term, meaning an uncle, but the Fools choice to stay with Lear unquestioningly, no matter the circumstance, illustrates the Fools loyalty far more than his affectionate nick names.

Even more interestingly is the Fools contentment with the situation. While the Fool does plea for Lear to find shelter, even going so far as to plead Lear to forgive his daughters, he does not attempt to leave himself. He stays with Lear even when Lear ignores his pleas. The fool even imparts a wise song relating to accepting one's fortunes:

Fool: He that has and a little tiny wit- 
With hey, ho, the wind and the rain- 
Must make content with his fortunes fit, 
For the rain it raineth every day.

 This relationship seems actually fairly well reciprocated by Lear. At the end of the play Lear laments his Fool with just as much fervor as he does the death of Cordelia, his own daughter, "And my poor fool is hang'd! No, no, no life!". Lear's lamentation confirms the Fool to be as dear as a family member. This really gives the fool a lot of power in the play, and elevates him to a status as equal to a prince. Looking at Lear from a moral and social justice point of view, this is part of Lear's lesson. He has truly equalized his view of the world. He values the Fools truth and loyalty over vanity, and the appearance of his elder daughters love. The Fool was just as valuable to Lear as Cordelia was. A Powerful notion for a "lower class" citizen of the time, and definitely something to think about in a summer storm.

Lady Macbeth Vs. Queen Cersei Lannister from Game of Thrones

Let's talk about insane wives and queens! Insanity in matrimony combined with the leadership of a nation is always an entertaining combination. These women are creepily similar in their callous ambition, and it comes back to haunt both of them, though in different ways.

One of their biggest commonalities is their seeming willingness to kill babies:

I would, while it was smiling in my face, Have pluck'd my nipple from his boneless gums, And dash'd the brains out, had I so sworn as you Have done to this.

Lady Macbeth infers that she has possibly smashed a babies brains in, while Queen Lannister, in the first episode, lets her brother/lover throw a ten year old boy out of a tower window. You just lose a certain level of sympathy when you condone the killing of minors. For both characters the baby killing references happen early in the story. This sets these characters up as evil or mad. You never get a chance to build any sympathy for them, they start out as unlikable characters.

While you don't start with any sympathy for these characters, you do build up a sort of pity for them. For Lady Macbeth, by the time she is saying "Out Damned Spot", she has gone mad from her own guilt. This is a situation where we don't condone her actions but we do sympathize. Her madness is her redemption. Queen Lannister, isn't as lucky. She also has her choices come back to haunt her, but she doesn't get any sympathetic escape (at least at the end of season one). The Queen successfully completes her coup to have her son placed on the throne, but she can not control him. Through the last episodes, it is obvious that Queen Lannister wanted Nathan Stark removed from power, but not killed. Her young king would not have that. He is an obviously rash and reckless king, which, instead of setting up the Lannisters to rule "for a thousand years" as Tywin Lannister said, will probably end up in the House falling through Civil War with the Starks. This is a similar end to the one that befalls Macbeth's reign, but Queen Lannister does not have the scapegoat of insanity from her ruthlessness, at least not yet. It is obvious that the guilt of Stark's death haunts her from her reaction to his execution.