Reaching Lifelong Goals

You never know where being a non traditional student is going to take you.   I am taking ENG 202 “Middle Shakespeare” as a baccalaureate core class for my BA in History.   Little did I know these last two terms would be a History Major’s favorite journey into Elizabethan England.   I am investigating more of the history of the streets of London than the real plays we are studying.   Each new play we focus on, opens up a new avenue of historical research that I seem to be diverted into…I know, it’s a guy thing -  Ohhh, shiny object!!! I’ll go this way!!    This Nontraditional student journey is just getting better each term in college.   I can turn any class I’m taking into a historical investigation.    My Biology teacher had Darwin’s Origin of the Species book in class for a lecture yesterday.   I found myself pouring over the references in the index finding historical tidbits about all kinds of things.   Made a bunch of notes and now I find myself digging around in all kinds of new side-tracks.    But, I digress,  did the Bard have a STD?   I think he may have gotten chlamydia from the dark lady.   There is some good circumstantial evidence in the Sonnets as well as Shakespeare’s other plays.    Of course, I decided to write a research paper on this topic!!    Who says Non Traditional Students are boring!!   Today, I received my paper back with a resounding A+ grade.    (Actually I’m on a run of all A+ on papers for this instructor!!)   I am reprinting it for your approval here in this blog posting.   Note that the format has changed to make it work on a WordPress blog.   I hope you enjoy the paper. (continue reading…)

My “fun” class this Winter term is ENG 202 “Middle Shakespeare”.   It is not officially a history class, but my instructor, Peter Jensen is one of the most interesting I have had.   His lectures are peppered with historical tidbits that get my History Geek juices flowing.   I have researched more about Elizabethan England over the past few months than my specialized topic of WWI Aviation.   Each term, Peter assigns 4 research papers based on the plays we are focusing on.   This term we are looking at Shakespeare’s middle career works, Henry IV part 1, Much Ado About Nothing and Hamlet.   A special study is the Sonnets.  (there is a whole blog post coming about my instructor’s theories about renaissance code imbedded in the Shakespeare Sonnets…fun stuff!).   For my first paper this term, I began looking at how the Bard would stage battle scenes in his history plays.   I stumbled across some very interesting information about what sources (historical “chronicles”) Shakespeare used in writing his history plays.   It is very difficult to write a Shakespeare paper for this teacher, you can’t tell him anything he doe not already know!!    HOWEVER!! I got him on this one.   I found a Journal Article in the Shakespeare Quarterly about a historical chronicle that Shakepeare probably used for this play.   I found a reference that my teacher had not yet heard about!!!   Major victory for the History Geek!   I guess he owes me TWO beers now (Last term’s Shakespeare In Love Historical Inaccuracies Paper found one that he had missed).   I wanted to share my A+ research paper about Shakespeare’s Histories and Henry IV. Part I.    The paper is titled:  SHREWSBURY: The Battle on the Grass Vs. The Battle on the Boards.

William Shakespeare’s interpretation of history is closer to real events than one might expect in a stage production.   Shakespeare’s histories are small vignettes of famous characters in the rich chronicles of England’s monarchies.    He relates the actual history to his audience with both accuracy and dramatic license.  The constraints of the “boards” can be challenging when trying to depict an epic battle scene such as Shrewsbury.

The actual battle was a major event  in the Wars of the Roses during the early 15^th century.   During  the Battle of Shrewsbury in July 1403, King Henry IV led an army of about 20,000 to a river plain near the strategic town of Shrewsbury.   Sir Henry “Hotspur”  Percy, leader of the rebellion forces was outnumbered, leading a force of possibly 15,000.   The archers he had gathered in Cheshire were superior to those of the King.   This was the first great battle where longbow faced longbow, and many of the casualties, believed to be about 3,000 on each side, came from the arrow-storms in the early part of the battle.  Henry IV faced more rebellions through his reign, so Shrewsbury was far from decisive. But it did show the future Henry V the power of the English longbow, an arm he deployed to devastating effect in France at Agincourt  in 1415(Britain).

Of course, the logistics of staging an epic battle scene are challenging to a playwright.   Shakespeare takes the real history of the battle and presents  it to his audience within the scope of the characters’ experiences on the battle field.   This gives the overall feeling of a huge dynamic conflagration and yet still furthers the plot of the play.   Shakespeare brings the two sides of the battle together on stage as Prince Hal and Hotspur confront each other in Act 5 scene 4.  While not historically correct, this hand to hand combat scene personalizes the entire Battle of Shrewsbury and its importance to England’s monarchy.  Hotspur himself was killed, not by Hal’s sword, but by an arrow through the mouth when he opened the visor of his helmet to get some fresh air.

Shakespeare gives us  accurate insights into history with Falstaff’s account of recruiting soldiers through the use of the “King’s Press” (Act 4, Scene 2).   The Elizabethan audiences would have been able to relate to this speech directly  or even personally.   Falstaff gives a historically accurate account of how armies were formed during the medieval period.   The King of  England’s professional, free standing army was still 200 years in the future.   The use of press gangs was in use  for Royal Navy recruits well into the 18^th century, even though the life of a British Sailor was far superior to the poverty that they came from.     As a historian, Shakespeare got quite a few details of the period correct.    Where did Shakespeare get his information about English history?

As I learned through my research of Richard III, Shakespeare relied on Sir Thomas Moore’s Chronicles for a background of the history of that period.   I am convinced that for the history of Henry IV, there are two main chronicles that Shakespeare most likely had for reference.   There is substantial evidence that the historian Rafael Holinshed’s The Chronicles of  England, Scotland  and Ireland published in 1587 (Holinshed) could have been of great influence.   Being the consummate history geek that I am, I spent a couple of hours of research time reading the actual 1587 volume available online from the Furness Collection.   Although difficult to read in the Elizabethan English, I was able to find real details of Holinshed’s account of Henry IV and his negotiations surrounding the battle of Shrewsbury.   Based on this Chronicle, I am convinced that not only did Shakespeare get much of the history correct; he probably got it from this chronicle.

There is  also evidence that Shakespeare used John Hardyng’s Chronicle for information to develop Hotspur’s character.   In a journal article for Shakespeare Quarterly, Gilian West proposes: “It is hard to believe that  Shakespeare did not read this autobiographical declaration linking John Hardyng to the household of Sir Henry Percy, for, in writing I Henry IV, he seems to have studied with keen interest Hardyng’s brief account of Percy’s rebellion”(West).   The author presents a compelling argument listing some of Shakespeare’s lines for Hotspur that directly relate to Hardyng’s Chronicle.  She goes on to state: “More important, the play’s interpretation of the rebellion seems strongly influenced by the favorably biased narrative of Hotspur’s loyal retainer.” (West)   I agree with the interpretation that this Chronicle would be a secondary source that Shakespeare probably used to bring Sir Henry Percy to life on stage.

I have found through my historical study of both Richard III and I Henry IV that Shakespeare expertly weaves actual historical facts into beautiful stories that entertained the Elizabethan audiences on his stage.   Being able to portray an epic battle scene such as Shrewsbury with character- driven vignettes is truly one of Shakespeare’s greatest strengths as a dramatist.   Shakespeare’s Histories are turning out to be more than just great plays; they are new portals for my ongoing journey as a History Major.

Information Britain.com. “The 21st of July 1403 Ad, Battle of Shrewsbury, Famous Dates in History”. 2007. 23 Jan 2010. web.

Holinshed, Rafael. Holinshed’s Chronicles (1587). The Chronicles of England, Scotland and Ireland. Ed. Schoenberg Center for Electronic text and Image. London, 1587.

West, Gilian. “Hardyng’s “Chronicle” And Shakespeare’s Hotspur.” Shakespeare Quarterly Vol. 41, No. 3 (Autumn, 1990) (1990): 348-51.

I was noticing today that again, the wheat has been separated from the chaff after the first week of Winter term.   Like last term, which was crazy crowded, a large number of students have disappeared from my classes.   I would assume that a lot of the drops came from rescheduling and not needing certain classes.   Of course, I notice in my 8:00 AM Math 065 class some of the “younger” and “traditional” students are not there this week.  Like last term, us older students, the Nontraditional ones, are still hard at it.   I have been focusing on undergraduate baccalaureate core classes while I’m getting my math requirements done.   These classes are the usual undergrad fare, ENG 201, BI-103, HST 202…the kind all folks need in their core.    The load in these classes is high at my local community college  and there is quite a variety of students in each.   After the first week of “thinning”, I notice that my classmates are the real students who are motivated and driven toward a goal.  (I thought that I would share some more photos of the Oregon Coast trip for my wife’s birthday in this post, I hope nobody minds…You can click on the photos for a larger version)   The frantic pace of the first week of Winter term is now settled down to the routine of studying and lectures.   The students who are left in my classes are busy with the ebb and flow of regular coursework.   I have been planning my research papers for my Shakespeare English class.   We are studying middle Shakespeare, which includes the Sonnets.   This is  my “fun” class for the term as my instructor fulfills my historical needs in his lectures with great tidbits about Elizabethan England.   I always seem to relate my classes to a Historian’s perspective, even with my science credits, I find myself researching the history of the geologists and biologists.   My advice to all of my fellow Nontraditional students is to just relax, get into the flow of your classes this term and simply enjoy the experience.     (I hope you are enjoying the photos) (continue reading…)

I have been neglecting everyone for too long…   I am in finish the term panic mode.   Papers, math tests, History independent studies…the list goes on.   Hope to make up some ground over the long Thanksgiving Holiday.   As a treat for all of you, I am posting my recent research paper for my ENG201, Early Shakespeare class.   I challenged my instructor to a beer if I could find a historical inaccuracy in the 1998 movie “Shakespeare In Love” that he did not spot.    I WON THE CHALLENGE!!!    My paper was a A+ success.   Have a Happy Thanksgiving everyone and enjoy the read.

Shakespeare in Love – Historical Inaccuracies

In the 1998 blockbuster hit Shakespeare in love the film makers present a wonderful romance, a rich story and spectacular costumes.   However, in the very first frame of the movie, they make the mistake of throwing down the gauntlet to Elizabethan historians by flashing “London 1593″.   One must have the ability to exercise suspension of disbelief to enjoy this movie at face value.   With the date set at 1593 this immediately ties the events in the film to known history.   It is however, just a film, a fictional love story and is filled with wonderful historical tidbits (when you can find the accurate ones…).

For this exercise, we need to differentiate between the historical inaccuracies based on three criteria: “sight gags” and comedy “bits” that have no pretence of being historically accurate; incorrect Elizabethan period references and facts; and finally actual blatant historical inaccuracies in the film.   Given that this is a fictional Hollywood production and not a documentary of Shakespeare’s London, the general viewing public was probably oblivious to what Historians find issue with.

A few of the “stage business gags” of note are illustrated here: Shakespeare on the pseudo psychiatrist’s “couch” being analyzed about his writers block.   The souvenir mug on his desk that reads “A present from Stratford-on-Avon” rests on the playwright’s desk.    We hear individuals in the streets speaking “future” lines from his plays as Shakespeare walks by somehow not noticing.    Shakespeare jumping into a ferryboat on the Thames and shouting “follow that boat!   There are many more examples of these gags throughout the film.   I find these small bits non offensive to my Historian principles and accept them for what they are, entertainment.  These small bits only add to the feel of Shakespeare’s London as being the “Hollywood” of Elizabethan times.  This is probably best illustrated by the ferryman with a “script” that he tries to get Will to read.

This brings us to the second level of inaccuracy, incorrect items or images of Elizabethan London in the late 1500s.   One of the most glaring inaccuracies takes place in the tavern where the actors are celebrating and hear of Marlowe’s murder.   In this scene, everyone is drinking their ale from glass beakers.   They look like a modern day pilsner glass.   This is a major period error as the vessels would most probably be made of pewter.

The second major historical inaccuracy is Queen Elizabeth attending the performance of Romeo and Juliet in the movie.   She is in disguise and reveals herself at the end of the production.   Of course, this is a most improbable scenario, the Queen had the plays brought to her instead.   While this plot piece works in the movie it is totally wrong historically.

Another problem harkens back to the first frame “London 1593″ reference.   The period that this film is supposed to be taking place in was during a closure from the plague.   As noted by Andrew Gurr, “The 1592–4 period was difficult for the acting companies of London; a severe outbreak of bubonic plague meant that the London theatres were closed almost continuously from June 1592 to May 1594.” (Gurr, p.38)  Even though there was a scene to cover this inaccuracy, the fact still remains that London’s theaters were not open during the year of this movie.

Perhaps it was Tom Stoppard’s poetic license, but it also should be recognized that the names of the acting companies and the theaters are not correct historically.  Are the Admiral’s Men, possibly relating to Sir Walter Raleigh?   These inaccuracies can be excused based on the fictional basis for the story.  It was in 1594 that Shakespeare founded the Chamberlain’s men, a full year after their mention in the movie.

There is a reference to Titus Andronicus by one of the actors as if they had already performed the play.   Another reference to the play by Will,   “Marlowe’s touch was in my Titus Andronicus” alluding he received “help” from Marlowe in the writing.   Here is an obscure reference to the theory (totally unfounded) that Shakespeare did not write his own plays.  Again, historically inaccurate as it was first recorded performance was in early 1594.   This is just the beginning of the major historical inaccuracies that are related to the now infamous frame…London 1593.

As a Historian, the rather blatant and most troubling historical inaccuracies of Shakespeare in Love revolve around two distinct themes.

First, the multiple references by Lord Wessex about taking Viola DeLesseps to his “plantation” in Virginia.   Again, with the stated date of 1593 for this movie, there lies one of the most blatant historical inaccuracies within.   Eric Foner, in his American history textbook states: “The colonists, mostly young men under military leadership abandoned the venture (Virginia colony 1586) and returned to England.  A second group of 100 settlers, composed of families was dispatched that year.   Their fate remains a mystery.    When a ship bearing supplies arrived in 1590, the sailors found the colony abandoned…”(Foner) Tobacco plantations were not established in Virginia until a full 20 years past the date of this reference in the movie.   Additionally, one other glaring inaccuracy in the very last scene of the movie adds to this theme of the “Americas”.    Viola (implied) is shown walking across a vast expanse of beach alone.   As the shot pans away and the scene of a sandy beach, probably a mile wide is shown.   This is panoramic and visually powerful, however, totally inaccurate historically.   The only possible place that Lord Wessex could have taken Viola would be the Jamestown colony (founded 1607).   The settlements were established inland on the Chesapeake where there was a viable harbor.    This historical bobble is my “Secret ace in the hole!”

The other great historical inaccuracy of the film revolves around the story itself.  Given that this film is a fictional work about the Bard in London 1593, some allowances can be made…but!     The whole idea that Romeo and Juliet was inspired by Shakespeare’s love for Viola is a nice romantic fable, but is probably far from the truth.   And again, the date of 1593 has its issues as well.   The connection with Marlowe and his murder (May 30, 1593)    sort of fits the timeline of the movie, but not a relationship with Romeo and Juliet.   If there is to be a romantic connection with Shakespeare’s works, the dark lady of the sonnets would have been a better choice for the movie.  (I eagerly anticipate the opportunity to research this in forthcoming papers for ENG 203)   The portrayal of Shakespeare having a torrid love affair that inspires Romeo and Juliet is for the movie going masses and is a red flag to Shakespearean Historians.

And to top all of this off, the final scene where we see Shakespeare writing the play “Twelfth Night” and transforming Viola into a character.  This play may have been in Shakespeare’s “to do” list, but was not written for another seven years (1600).   I prefer to think that the Viola reference is botanical and not romantic.

Being the consummate history geek, I had to watch this movie twice for this exercise.  One time, with a keen eye for all of the historical inaccuracies, and again, with great suspension of disbelief to enjoy the movie for its art.

Happy Non Traditional Student Week!!    This week, November 2-7 is National Non Traditional Student Week!!   Yippeee!!   I found this information online, not at my campus.   While I am still taking my Math courses at a community college, I do have ties to Oregon State starting next term.   OSU has a Non Traditional Student Taskforce which I am going to support.   To my knowledge, there is no “planned” activities for Non Trad Week.   This is probably because Non Trad students are the busiest students on any campus.   This special week falls during some schools mid term exams…good timing.   I will pass the word around my fellow non trads, maybe we can celebrate over a cup of coffee.  I will put this week in my calendar for next year and make darn sure there is the proper recognition publicly.   I spent the last weekend working on a paper for ENG 201, so I was not planning any special events for this week.   I’ll do better next year!    If your campus Non Traditional Student group has any activities for this special week, be sure and post a comment about them so we can get the word out.   I have read some articles in a couple of East Coast college newspapers that are online, but so far nothing from this side of the nation.