The Bicks Pod

Topic Introduction:

What's in a face? That's the question we tackle this episode, with an auditory look at the various faces that have been purported to be of Shakespeare over the ages. Which portraits have been put forth as depictions of the Bard? Of those, which are most likely, and which have been discredited? 

List of Portraits Discussed in this Episode:

The Stratford monument: In Stratford-upon-Avon, installed in 1617-1618 above the chancel in Holy Trinity Church, which is where Shakespeare is buried.

The First Folio engraving by Martin Droeshout: The most famous portrait of Shakespeare, featured on the title page of the First Folio.

The Chandos Portrait: Aka the sexy earring portrait. Possibly depicts Shakespeare in costume as Shylock. Definitely dates from the first decade of the 17th century. Owned by the National Portrait Gallery.

The Cobbe Portrait: One of the more recently identified portraits potentially of Shakespeare.

The Sanders Portrait: Maybe our favourite (as a Canadian, if nothing else). Has undergone possibly the most rigorous testing of any of the supposed portraits of Shakespeare. 

The Soest Portrait: Aka Greg. Just a nice guy.

...and the rest, which have all been disproved as portraits of Shakespeare:

Grafton

Notes on terminology:

dendrochronology: the study of tree rings, used specifically to date a piece of wood. Used in the art world to determine the age and possibly the years of growth of the paneling a portrait or painting has been painted on.

microscopic analysis: examines signs of aging in the paint layer. Looks at things such a craquelure, pigment saturation, efforts at restoration and other such things that can only be seen under a microscope.

IR spectroscopy: uses infrared (IR) light to determine specific properties of a painting, like the paint or glue used in its production. Can also be used on wood to determine dating. 

Ancient Bickerings:

Today is less of a debate and more of an opinion piece: Which portrait do we each want to be authentically of Shakespeare?

This week we explore one of the lesser-known history plays, Richard II. The chronological jumping-off point for the story that will eventually result in the Wars of the Roses (covered in previous episodes), this play is a through examination of the distinctions between man and king, god and country, and power and helplessness. Join us for a deep dive into the character of Richard himself, the language used to describe jolly old England, what the play is telling us about fathers and sons, and the interesting set-up for the upcoming Henry IV and Henry V plays.

Ancient Bickerings:

This week we dove into a favourite topic concerning kings named "Richard" - is Richard II a tragic figure? Lindsay said "yay" Aidan "nay" and somehow they both turned out to be wrong and right.

Shakespeare's sonnets are often the first and perhaps the easiest entry point for beginning students. They are lovely little bite-sized poems that exist in discrete units which can be appreciated as works of deep emotion and literary beauty or in grand cycles in the poetic tradition that lead the reader through a flurry of emotion when read together with other similarly-themed sonnets. Most of all, they contain some of Shakespeare's most romantic and certainly most famous written passages.

Our study today tackles the sonnets from both angles. We consider the history of the sonnet and the tradition within which Shakespeare wrote his 154-cycle work of art, before branching out into the works themselves, looking at them within the three distinct groups scholars have identified and as works unto themselves. 

Eternal Bickering

It's a new year, a new decade, and so our newly named "Eternal Bickering" segment sees us tackling the age-old question of how to read the sonnets: Should they be considered autobiographical or not?

Notes:

- List of Sonnets (with notes)

- An Outline of the Contents of Shakespeare's Sonnets

- The 8 Types of Sonnets and How to Tell Them Apart (check out the Terza Rima, Curtal, and Modern Sonnet!)

- A fascinating article from the British Library about Mary Fitton, scandalized by her out-of-wedlock pregnancy by Shakespeare's patron, the 3rd Earl of Pembroke, and candidate for Shakespeare's Dark Lady.

It is the humble opinion of your hosts that Shakespeare starts coming into his own as a truly innovative playwright in Love's Labour's Lost. Up until this point, the plays have been fairly straightforward in presentation, structure, and subject matter; in LLL, all of that is played with, to great effect. Starting with this play, Shakespeare starts showing the sense of playfulness as a writer, experimenting with his craft, that marks some of the great works that follow.

A conventional love story on the surface--four noble men fall in love with four noble women; hilarity ensues--bucks the trends of comedy (there's no marriage at the end) and comments on its own production ("That's too long for a play") and does so with tremendous flair and wit that Shakespeare is well-known for today, but which must have been terrifically fresh when the play was first written and performed in the middle-1590s.

In today's bickering session, we debate the question of whether or not Love's Labour's Lost is a comedy or... something else?

Other Notes

The 2000 Kenneth Branagh film has been pretty thoroughly scrubbed from the internet, but we did locate a German trailer for the dub of the film:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=53hDoUMvZhk

As well as this audio from the original trailer, mixed up with a webseries that seems loosely based on the same events as the play: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mVuR945tOqk&feature=emb_logo 

Of all Shakespeare's works, we were surprised to find that the most prescient and insightful thus far was not one of Shakepseare's plays, but one of his long form narrative poems. In the MeToo era, you'll find more willingness to discuss the terrible realities and long-lasting effects of sexual assault and gendered sexual power dynamics, but it was surprising to see them tackled so head-on in a poem from the 16th century.

In this episode we talk about the gender politics the two contrasting poems put forward, the insanely high quality of Shakespeare's writing, and the amazing psychological and artistic depths he was already reaching at this point - all while providing some of the historical and literary context that would help a new reader approach the texts.

This episode is also deserving of our first content warning, as we discuss sexual assault, unwanted sexual advances, and generally don't shy away from talking about the full range of what Shakespeare put forth in this unforgiving look at sex, desire, and power. Listen with care.

Mistaken identity! Random beatings! Two sets of identical twins! After the far more dramatic moments of the first Henriad comes a bit of a more lighthearted play, namely the all-too-aptly-titled Comedy of Errors.

This episode we discuss the relatively scant deeper ideas wedged into this fun-hearted romp through the streets of Ephesus: lost sense of identity and the growing fascination in Shakespeare's time with all things monetary. Mostly though, this is a chance to enjoy Shakespeare at his comedic best - slapstick, silly, and utterly simple.

For a dramatist mostly known for being indecipherable, it's worth mentioning the numerous adaptations of this play that have been made, just since the 1980s. Wikipedia has an excellent listing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Comedy_of_Errors#Film

If you've trudged through the first History Tetralogy alongside us, you'll be wondering if there's any real opportunity to redeem the Henry VI plays and their obtuse combination of too many characters, complete lack of linear time, and wandering focus. Thankfully the BBC and a very talented set of actors, writers, directors, and producers have answered that wondering with a resounding yes. Join us for our examination of The second season of the Hollow Crown, which condenses the Henry VI plays down into two two-hour dramas that manage to focus the plot, cut the extra characters, and weave a better story out of Shakespeare's original text.

Notes:

Production Cost - there's at least a mention of the first season costing approximately 9 million pounds (approximately $11.6 million USD as of writing, but much more before the pound started sinking these past few years). This is particularly impressive given the level of the cast that was assembled for the show, as well as the extremely high production value we remark on in the course of this episode.

Marriage Counselling - this episode we looked at what we would have brought back from the original Shakespeare, that the Hollow Crown left out. In doing so we also pick out a few of the weaker items from the TV series that could have made way for pieces of the Shakespearean play.

This episode brings us to the conclusion of the Wars of the Roses, and to the emergence of Shakespeare's first great villain, the short-reigning English king, Richard III. Long a fan and public favourite of the Bard's, this play is noteworthy for a number of reasons, including its continued relevance in the world's varied political realms. Join us for a discussion of the characters, the story, and the political interpretations of one of England's most reviled monarchs, and one of Shakespeare's most engaging characters.

Marriage Counselling:

This episode's marriage counsel debate revolved around which modern politician most resembles Richard III. If you've ever wanted to hear us slag two conservative politicians from North America, this is the debate for you.

Extra notes:

• A quick search reveals that no one has, as of yet, trademarked the term "Tragic Anti-Hero" so maybe Lindsay can corner the market and open a new front of Richardian discourse

Richard III is supposed to have been a conniving and megalomaniacal ruler. Henry Tudor believed he was a usurper, having wrested control of the crown and throne of England from his brother, Edward IV’s, line of succession, which he later claimed was actually illegitimate. And he has stood accused of orchestrating the murders of his other elder brother George, Duke of Clarence, several advisors to his late brother King Edward IV, his own wife Anne Neville, and—most famously—his nephews, Edward V and Richard of Shrewsbury, the young Princes in the Tower.

Was Richard the evil usurping murderer that the Tudors and William Shakespeare himself would have us believe? Or was he, as Richardians insist, a victim of smear campaigns and propaganda at the hands of the victors of England’s bloodiest dynastic battle?

Richard III: Tyrannical Murderer or Misunderstood King? That's the question we want to discuss in today's episode of The Bicks Do Shakespeare.

Notes:

"Richard III: The King in the Car Park" - Channel 4 documentary

Titus Andronicus is one of Shakespeare's bloodiest plays, set around the Roman revenge tragedy of its titular character and the fateful fall of his family.

Along with most of the other characters as well.

S. Clarke Hulse, in his essay "Wresting the Alphabet: Oratory and Action in 'Titus Andronicus'", counts "14 killings, 9 of them on stage, 6 severed members, 1 rape (or 2 or 3, depending on how you count), 1 live burial, 1 case of insanity and 1 of cannibalism—an average of 5.2 atrocities per act, or one for every 97 lines." It can be a supremely challenging play to read and watch, in spite of its short length, and the distate for this play permeates its production history; it fell out of favour in the 18th and 19th century and is still considered one of Shakespeare's least-popular plays.

But if you can set aside the discomforting facts of the gruesome murders committed its 2500 or so lines, there are some interesting things being presented here. The conflation of civilized Rome and barbaric Goths, rape and revenge, the role of women as either mothers or monsters/virgins or whores, and the weaponization of language are all fascinating avenues of entry into the horror of the Bard's ancient Roman revenge fantasy.

In Marriage Counselling, Aidan and Lindsay debate "Who is responsible for everything that goes wrong in Titus Andronicus?"

Notes:

S. Clarke Hulse - "Wresting the Alphabet: Oratory and Action in 'Titus Andronicus'"