Review of 'As You Like It' by William Shakespeare

I absolutely thought that 'As You Like It' was one of the Shakespeare plays I'd never bothered to get around to. But, as I started to read it, hints of familiarity came flooding back and I realised that one of my favourite Shakespeare quotes (and what I named this whole blog after) came from this play!

'As You Like it' is one of Shakespeare's comedies, attributed to his mid-career in terms of the time frame of his plays. It follows the story of Rosalind, whose father is exiled by her uncle and ultimately is exiled by her uncle. Orlando, exiled by his own brother, meets Rosalind and her cousin Celia who are now living in a forest. Rosalind is disguised as a man, Ganymede, to protect her and Celia. When 'Ganymede' meets Orlando, he learns of his love for Rosalind. 

The whole play, as with many of his comedies is all about disguise and misunderstandings. Rosalind was played by a boy pretending to be a girl pretending to be a man who then pretends to be a woman to faux-woo Orlando. A woman falls in love with 'Ganymede' who does not really exist, whilst Orlando is in love with Rosalind but does not know Ganymede and Rosalind are the same person.

It's not one of my favourite plays, but is a great one of the comedies, so I'm giving this 4 out of 5 stars.

Follow me on Bloglovin | Twitter | Instagram | Youtube 

My 10 favourite classics of all time

I think it's been over a year now since I posted anything other than just a straight up review on here, and I've decided to make things a little bit more varied over the next couple of months. I'm kick-starting this with this super-quick top 10 classics post. Hopefully (maybe?) it'll inspire your choice in the next classic to read, or you'll be able to relate with me on some level about my love for that particular text. So, without any further babble, let's go. 

In no particular order, here are my 10 favourite classic texts of all time:

1.) Pablo Neruda's poetry, in particular 'Ode to the Clothes'. He manages to make the most ordinary of things the most beautiful, and really changed my opinion of what poetry could do.

2.) Fitzgerald's The Great Gatsby. Let's face it, this was always going to be on my list, I mean, I am an ex-English student after all. This was the first text I ever remember studying in which it was clear that the author had imbued every scene with symbolism and hidden meanings.

3.) Shakespeare's Titus Andronicus. This is one of his earliest and least famous texts. It's also one of his bloodiest and seeing it at the RSC was a once-in-a-lifetime treat for me that I'll never forget.

4.) Dickens' Bleak House. Part of me has no idea why I like this - it's long, I had to make a physical list of characters so I didn't get confused, and the plot has about 17 thousand strands. But, seeing all those strands come together and finally reading a book in which Dickens offered a fairly realistic insight into the mind of a woman (for once) made it all worth it. 

5.) Emily Bronte's Wuthering Heights. Pre-warn: there are going to be a fair few Victorian texts on here, but I love them, so we're all just gonna have to deal with it. This is possibly my favourite book of all time, and it's something that I really savour coming back to time and time again. I've possibly read it five? times now and each time I come away feeling bowled over by this woman's incredible writing.

6.) Charlotte Bronte's Jane Eyre. I actually remember borrowing this off of my mum when I was a teenager and I fell totally in love with the whole Jane-Rochester debacle. I'd tried reading Austen before, and assumed all Victorian texts fell under the same dreary brush (sorry Austen fans), but this definitely opened up my eyes to the power of Victorian literature.

7.) Stoker's Dracula. I've got a little confession here: I only actually read this for the first time about a year and a half ago. It's one of those texts that was so hyped up I was actually put off of it. When I read it however I was totally wowed by how many of our notions about Vampires come from this one text, and how forward it was in terms of discussing sex.

8.) Hardy's Tess of the D'Ubervilles. All I can say is that I warned you about how much of this would be Victorian. Sorry not sorry. Seriously though, get your hands on an unedited copy of this and you can get a real insight into how society treated a 'fallen' aka non-virginial woman, way back when.

9.) Harriet Beecher Stowe's Uncle Tom's Cabin. This broke my heart and mended it all over again about seven times. If you're looking for an insight into the world of America's slave trade, then this is a good place to start.

10.) Donne's 'The Broken Heart'. I actually read this Medieval poem when I was studying my a-levels, in an attempt to secure some extra reading to help with my university application. What I didn't envision was falling totally in love with it and finding what still remains my favourite poem of all time.

I honestly thought I was going to struggle to think of 10 texts, but here I am struggling to contain all my favourites within a mere list of ten. I feel like writing this post in itself has been a journey for me, reminding me of why I love reading, and why certain books touched me at certain points in my life. I'm also feeling totally inspired to get back in to reading poetry and plays, to the extent that I'm now considering having a 'poem of the week' post once a week. Would you guys like that? I'd love to hear some input!

Review of "The Man of Mode"

The above excerpt from this 17th century play sounds like it could have come out of the mouth of Lady Macbeth, however, writing over half a century later, the playwright Etherege had quite a number of different aims in his portrayal of the scorned women. The political climate of Etherege's writing was one of libertinism. Charles 1 had been killed and a spirit of puritanism had entertained the interregnum, but with the Restoration seeing Charles II put on the throne, a period of somewhat licentious behaviour ensued. Charles II was known for his many mistresses, and if you've ever read any of Rochester's poetry, you'll know how, let's say "saucy" Restoration literature can be! 

Dorimant, a man of wit, convinces the town that through the contraction of a venereal disease he has become impotent. In this way he can allow men to let him have access to their wives, believing that he can do them no harm (the rogue!). Mrs Loveitt is one of the first to fall under his wiles and realise that she desires him. After this, women seem to keep falling into his trap. Sir Fopling Flutter on the other hand, as his name suggests, is the foppish laughing stock of the play - misplaced attempts at wit, unfashionable clothing and outdated speech make him far less desirable to the women. The real question of the play is: will Dorimant's trickery be discovered? And by the men or the women of the play?

This play really made me think about how restrictive Victorian literature has been on the notion of sexuality, especially female sexuality. All of the women in this play display some level of sexual desire, even if it is misplaced in this man of supposed impotence. However, Mrs "Loveitt"s name in particularly gives a slightly negative outlook upon the notion of women chasing after men they desire. The complex natures of the women were also interesting as again, in later English literature this seems to have disappeared a tad. Here the women are at once devious, loving, skeptical, chaste and yet sexual creatures.

Rating:

Have you read it? What did you think?

Steph

Book A Day catch Up Pt 2 | Days 13-17

Day 13 | Stocking Filler

So, once again I've fallen behind - this time for a better reason though. I've been up to my neck in hectic essay writing!

This is one of my favourite copies of a text - it's a second hand Twelfth Night I picked up in The Paperback Exchange in Bognor Regis. As my smallest book, this would be a brilliant stocking filler (you'd have to be seriously in my good books though!).

Day 14 | Read at School

This is probably the only school text that I actually own! But it is also one of my faves. Despite my housemate and fellow English Lit student abhorring its existence, I love Fitzgerald's writing.

Day 15 | Favourite Colour Cover

Okay, you might not be able to see a great deal of the colour of this cover, BUT it is my favourite. 

Day 16 | For Someone I Love

Cue a tonne of n'awwws, but I'd give this to my nan. Despite my best efforts, neither my boyfriend, nor my immediate family particularly enjoy reading, or at least see the point in it in a similar way to me. Apart from nan who loves historical fiction. As this is my nicest copy of a Philippa Gregory book, I think I'd give this to her.

Day 17 | Something Funny

Let's be real, is anyone surprised that I chose this? Check out my review of this hilarious novel here. It's got pretty much everything you need for a witty tale of love and loss.

What were your choices?

Steph

Trip to the Home of Shakespeare

(Shakespeare's last house)

I realised that, as a third year English Lit student at Warwick, it's pretty shameful that I haven't been to visit Shakespeare's home in Stratford-Upon-Avon (which is just a relatively quick train ride away). So, a group of us who studied Shakespeare last year set off full of excitement. As you would expect for October in England, it rained on us. All day. But the gaudy lights of the massive fair we stumbled across in the centre of the town cast away the damp blues and created a brilliant atmosphere.

The quote at the top of the page was one of the most interesting things I saw in the Shakespeare Centre. Hidden amongst innovative sculptures and paintings of the infamous playwright himself from all over the globe, this served as a reminder of the long-lasting cultural impact Shakespeare has had. Although I knew that some of these were down to him I had no idea that he'd formed this large a part of our vernacular. 

The houses themselves were beautiful. The detail and care in which the people who worked there spoke about and looked after the furnishings of the house was just astounding. Plus Stratford itself was just adorable. I'm always a fan of old houses. Even if we did end up lunching at Zizzi's, looking at all the little independent restaurants just added to the atmosphere. Our last stop was an old-fashioned sweetshop. Who isn't a fan of these? You walk in and the shelves are lined up to the ceiling with jars of a huge array of sweets. Heaven.

Anyway, if you're thinking of going, or are just a fan of Shakespeare I'd highly recommend it. They've got a whole host of little activities to keep the kids entertained as you explore the houses, Plus the giftshop has everything any self-respecting bookaholic who likes Shakespeare would love (I had to restrain myself from buying a Shakespeare advent calendar - where else would you find that?!)

Steph x

Cross-dressing in Shakespeare's Plays

Cross-dressing in Shakespeare's plays is often inextricably linked with times of carnival. Although the rituals associated with modern-day carnivals developed from this concept it was obviously incredibly different during the early seventeenth century. Carnival was a period of license in authoritarian England which involved masquerade balls (which are themselves a form of cross-dressing), bouts of drinking, and a general inversion of social hierarchical order. Shrove Tuesday, the May Games and Misrule - the period extending from Christmas to Epiphany - are key dates associated with it. Carnival is followed by a period of lent or fasting.

Shakespeare highlights that Twelfth Night is going to be associated with carnivalesque themes through the very wording of this play's title. Twelfth Night is the last day of the period of Misrule, the most extravagant period of carnival in the year.the tension between carnival life and lent is evident throughout the play, and is potently explored through a multitude of characters' cross dress. the most obvious example of this is Viola who not only re-configures herself physically, but gives herself a man's name: Cesario. Viola subverts the natural hierarchical order of her position in society through this disguise. She recognises that in order to survive the shipwreck socially she must become a man; in this respect she saves her life to a greater extent than the Captain does. Here, to occupy the space of a woman onstage is to render oneself powerless. There is also a great deal of humour created through this disguise as the actor playing Viola in this play would have been a boy playing a woman playing a man. Humour and laughter are tropes of periods of carnival. Moreover, the layers of cross-dressing here hyperbolises the chaotic confusion of social hierarchies which carnival induces. 

It is interesting to see how cross-dressing creates an interplay with one's sexuality. Viola must engage in the language of courtship with Olivia on behalf of Orsino, which results in Olivia's acquisition of a homosexual attachment to Viola. This can evidently never be satisfied. Moreover, Viola's disguise renders the sexual boundaries of her and Orsino's relationship into a state of confusion. When he believes that Viola is a man he recognises the beauty of Viola/Cesario's red lips. Moreover, Orsino continues to call Viola Cesario even after she has revealed her female nature. Perhaps Shakespeare characterises these characters in such a way as to indicate that all genders and sexualities are performative. This allows Olivia's love for Cesario, as well as the homosexual relationship between Antonio and Sebastian, to evade negative connotations. There is a certain fluidity inherent to all gender relations in the play.

Similarly, in As You Like It Rosalind alters her gender in a performative manner in order to evade social ruin. She escapes her town and secures the man she loves as a result of her cross-dressing, This indicates that perhaps socially it is safer to be a man in Elizabethan England rather than a woman. Men, according to psychological theories of this period, were more rational creatures than woman, which may be a reason for Rosalind's success at manipulating her situation and keeping calm whilst she performs as Ganymede. the inverse of this is explored in Titus Andronicus when Titus dresses up as a female cook to enact his bloodthirsty revenge upon Tamora and her sons. The frantic bloodbath which follows highlights the chaotic nature of a woman's hysterical passions. Conversely, In Macbeth Lady Macbeth masculinises herself in order to conduct cold, efficient revenge.

What are your thoughts?

Stephanie

Is the greatest downfall of Shakespeare’s male tragic figures the fact that they underestimate the power of women?

The “heroes” of Shakespeare’s tragedies are often said to have a “fatal flaw” which leads them to their ruin. This fatal flaw could be hubris, jealousy, greed, or a variety of other emotions or drives. However, in many of Shakespeare’s tragedies the protagonist’s ruin is inextricably linked with the impact women in the play have upon his life. This appears to be true of Othello, Macbeth, King Lear and Antony and Cleopatra. All of the eponymous men of these tragedies are thwarted because they neither see the plots women are constructing nor do they appear to believe them capable of such a thing.

            Firstly, in Othello both Othello himself and Iago are doomed because they underestimate the power of the women in the play. Othello underestimates the power of Desdemona’s chastity. This leads him to believe Iago’s empty “evidence” for her infidelity and thus kill his newly-wed bride. In a sense Desdemona is powerless because she cannot control the manipulative lies spun by Iago, but the fact that Othello is driven to murder because of her sexual power shows that she has a great deal of this type of power simply because she is a woman. Moreover, the power women have to undermine the power of men in the play is highlighted in the fact that the volta of the play occurs when Emilia hands Iago the handkerchief; this piece of evidence is vital to the construction of his case for Desdemona and Cassio’s affair. Thus, without Emilia Iago may never have had the power to cause Othello’s downfall. Othello could never fathom the idea that Emilia may have stolen the handkerchief from Desdemona and given it to Iago because he is irrational and acts rashly rather than considering other possible ways in which Iago may have ended up with the handkerchief. Iago never acknowledges the help that Emilia gave him and appears to believe that his plot functions purely because of his own brilliant cunning. However, when Emilia exposes Iago to Othello at the end of the play as having constructed the plot which lead to Desdemona’s death Iago appears to realise that he has underestimated her. He underestimated the love that Emilia had for Desdemona, and for this he is ruined.

                        Similarly, the work of Macbeth in his eponymous play is driven forwards by his wife Lady Macbeth. Macbeth never truly appears to recognise to what extent he is controlled by his wife; this underestimation of her power causes his downfall. The murders of his intimate friend Banquo and the King he ought to respect are orchestrated by her. As soon as she latches on to the hope of him gaining power she becomes obsessed with it and drives him to seek more power. For this reason I believe that ambition is Lady Macbeth’s fatal flaw, not Macbeth’s. From the point at which she can see a powerful future, Macbeth becomes somewhat of a puppet for her bidding. Likewise, Antony in Antony and Cleopatra becomes a powerless man when he falls in love with the ambitious Cleopatra. Unlike Lady Macbeth, Cleopatra does not encourage Antony to do anything; he merely does what he thinks she would like him to do because he is so utterly besotted with her. To see a martial man so weakened in this way makes him a figure of ridicule; even his suicide is carried out for such a trivial reason that it is almost laughable. His death is directly caused by the hold that Cleopatra has over him, which even she underestimates. He never appears to understand that she is manipulating him, which allows him to underestimate the power she has over him and thus for her to cause his ruin.

            Lear on the other hand is not ruined by a lover but by his daughters. He does not believe that there could be untruths behind Regan and Goneril’s professions of love for him and thus hands over all of his lands to them. This makes him a powerless figure from very early on in the play as, without his lands, he has lost all of his authority as King. Moreover, he underestimates the fact that Cordelia could be wise and thus disinherits the only daughter who truly loved him. The further plotting of the two landed sisters results in both Lear and Cordelia being imprisoned which is closely followed by their deaths. Finally, by underestimating the power of all three of his daughters Lear not only causes his own ruin, but also that of the country.

The relationship between women and male power in Shakespeare’s Othello, Antony and Cleopatra and The Taming of the Shrew

Shakespeare’s plays, written during or shortly after Queen Elizabeth’s reign arguable present women in a relatively positive light. Although they do fall into the three stereotypical types of woman (the mother, the virgin and the whore), they use these roles to their advantage in order to subvert the whims and wills of men. At a time in which women were commonly understood to be subservient to men – although there was a female monarch at this time many people were upset at her lack of a husband to guide her – Shakespeare offers up outspoken, strong-headed, powerful women in the three aforementioned plays.

Firstly, in Othello a contrast is set up between the seemingly shy, subservient Desdemona and her loud, boisterous counterpart Emilia. Desdemona is a rather passive creature throughout the play; often she is only spoken about without being given the chance to air her opinions on things herself. Moreover, she is physically and verbally abused without being able to give a reasonable response to this because of her lack of understanding regarding the irrational (and foolish) actions of her husband. However, even this passive character is introduced to the audience as one who has denied the wishes of her father in staying at home and instead pursued her love affair with a “Moor”. This defiance would have been viewed as being very serious, as, indeed, it is by Brabantio who takes the issue to the Duke. In this way Shakespeare allows his most traditionally “feminine” character to subvert masculine demands for power. Furthermore, Emilia is used to highlight far more explicitly the power women have over men as she not only is responsible for Iago’s plan working so swiftly and smoothly by handing him Othello’s handkerchief, but also reveals his treachery to Othello at the end and thus causes his downfall. It has been argued by critics that Iago’s sole downfall in this play is the fact that he underestimates Emilia’s love for Desdemona: this is what ruins him. Thus she is the real puppet-master at the end of the play which reveals man’s subservience to the power of women.

Secondly, in Antony and Cleopatra the rivalry between Antony and Caesar would be the main plot strand of the play if Cleopatra was not quite so powerful. Antony’s extreme attraction to her, which even leads him to turn his ships around during a naval battle to follow her, makes the whole war almost laughable because it exposes just how controlled men are by their lovers: he is putty in Cleopatra’s hands. Her use of messengers to endlessly find out exactly what Antony is doing at any given time again shows just how much she is controlling him; he cannot do anything without being watched by her. Moreover, she manipulates the progress of the plot in the play: she ensured that Antony was not with his wife to look after his part of the Empire, she made the ships turn around, she directly caused Antony’s suicide, she even dictates Caesar’s actions once Antony is dead and finally she decides when and how she will die. Her aversion of Caesar’s plots highlight the fact that even arguably the most powerful man in the world cannot control a woman: she can always do this herself, even if it means going to extremes.

Finally, in The Taming of the Shrew the main body of the play is a play within the play. It is easy to forget that the play itself is about Christopher Sly and those who are playing a trick on him, it is not about making Katherine more “womanly”. The play in which Katherine and Petruchio play a part is constructed from male fantasy. Shakespeare is merely showing his audience what men believe should happen to outspoken women, not suggesting that all women should be subdued in this manner. The only woman in the play is the hostess of the inn who disappears after line ten having subjected Sly to her power by throwing him out of the public house as though he were an animal. Indeed, Kate arguably never becomes “tamed” as she is given the longest speech in the play at the very end of the play within the play; excessive talking is one of the prerequisites for being classed as a “shrew”. Shakespeare highlights the fact that men believe they have power over women by controlling their marriages as Baptista suggests the marriage between Kate and Petruchio and pursues it until it is done. Petruchio also insists on the marriage occurring without giving any thought to Katherine’s negating his marriage proposal. However, the main reason for the marriage going ahead is that there are other people manipulating the progression of the plot in order that Bianca can be married off; Kate is the only person who can give them that power by being married off herself. in this way Kate directs the whole course of the play and therefore can be seen as the most powerful individual in it. 

A Copernican Psychoanalytic Reading of "Hamlet"

            In Freud’s article titled A Difficulty in the Path of Psychoanalysis he outlined three blows which he believed to have been inflicted upon human narcissism. The first blow came from Copernicus, and a history of other scientists before him, who suggested that the earth was not at the centre of the universe. This displaced humans’ importance in the cosmos, and thus was termed the “cosmological blow” to human narcissism. The second came from Darwin who showed that humans were not created in the way in which they exist today, but evolved from other creatures. This removed humans from their pedestal over other animals, and thus was termed the “biological blow” to human narcissism. The third, Freud suggested, came from himself when he suggested that “the ego was not master in its own house”. This is the psychological blow to human narcissism. The ego is the part of the mind, in Freudian terms, which oversees what is going on and channels thoughts into either the conscious or unconscious depending on whether they cohere or go against the needs and wishes of the individual. In suggesting that the ego does not hold power in the mind, Freud indicates that the unconscious does. If one then follows a Laplanchian way of thinking the unconscious is an internal other, which does not come from within the individual, but is created through intromission from the adult to the infant in the primal scene. This primal scene is a scene of seduction, usually one in which the mother places her breast into the child’s mouth. She is consciously telling the child by doing this that she wishes to feed him, but unconsciously is sending enigmatic signifiers (enigmatic because neither child nor adult can translate them) which are sexual. This is a Copernican approach to psychoanalysis because it focuses on the importance of the external other in the creation of one’s unconscious, and indicates that the unconscious is not formed internally, but from the outside.

            To examine Hamlet in a Copernican way his relationship with his mother and father must be examined. The primal scene in this play occurs not between an infant and his mother, but between Hamlet and his father when the ghost comes to Hamlet and tells him of his murder. Intromission here happens through Hamlet’s ear. The ghost is consciously telling Hamlet to kill his uncle, but unconsciously sends an enigmatic signifier regarding Hamlet’s mother’s sexuality. Hamlet’s uncle killed the King and as a result gained the Queen’s (Hamlet’s mother’s) sexual desire; if Hamlet kills the King by the same logic he would gain her desire. This message cannot be translated by Hamlet and so is repressed into his unconscious, but it does drive the action of the play. He uses sexual and violent language to talk to his mother in the closet scene which not only suggests that he is considering her in a sexual manner, but also that he is repressing it. Indeed, during this scene, he stabs Polonius; in a Copernican reading this can be interpreted as him not doing it out of his own fear or suspicion, but it is a sexual act in which he is proving himself for his mother as his sword can be understood to be a phallic symbol.

            Moreover, a Copernican reading of Hamlet would also decentre the protagonist’s Oedipal desires in driving him to act, but instead focuses on his internal other, the unconscious. Hamlet is said to become insane in the play, but another interpretation of this could be that his ego loses control over his unconscious. His Oedipal complex (in which he loves his mother and feels a paradoxical love and hatred towards his father) is only thinly disguised as his need for some kind of justice for his father’s death. Hamlet delays in killing his uncle not because he does not have the means to, or does not wish to kill him, but because to kill his uncle would be a realization of the repressed wishes of his unconscious, placed there by the other. thus his internal other represses his need for revenge because of this reason, but his conscious self cannot see that and believes that he is delaying the murder for logical reasons.