Shakespeare

[Karl Henning]

You'll make me blush 

(* chortle *)

[Karl Henning]

At long last (we might say) I'm watching Olivier's Hamlet, which I ought to have watched long since, not only for the legendary actor, but for Walton's score.

When I saw in the opening credits Stanley Holloway as the Gravedigger, I nearly laughed aloud. I paused at that scene, to bring my wife in, and sure as eggs is eggs, she knew Alfred P. Doolittle's voice.

[JBS]

When I saw in the opening credits Stanley Holloway as the Gravedigger, I nearly laughed aloud. I paused at that scene, to bring my wife in, and sure as eggs is eggs, she knew Alfred P. Doolittle's voice.

[Karl Henning]

At long last (we might say) I'm watching Olivier's Hamlet, which I ought to have watched long since, not only for the legendary actor, but for Walton's score.

Disappointed. Indeed, borderline shocked that this Criterion DVD has bupkis in the way of supplements. Now, because our recently departed Simon reminded me of't: Olivier's Henry V

[JBS]

Almost finished reading this


The opening and closing chapters, which use Shakespeare as a vessel for talking about anti-Blackness in society and literary scholarship in general, are a bit generic. The examinations of Shakespeare's use of race and racial stereotypes in Othello*, Merchant of Venice, and Hamlet, on the other hand, are highly original and thought provoking. It would be nice to see productions of the latter two that incorporate his ideas (that Shylock's Jewishness is a stand-in for Blackness in a Venice where anti-Blackness is already part of the social order and Antonio is the paradigmatic white man, and that Hamlet uses the trope of the violent Black man in portraying both Claudius and Hamlet).  The only cavil I have with his presentation is the manner in which he implies Shakespeare was critiquing/examining/subverting anti-Blackness, whereas he may have merely been using/shaping early racial stereotypes and tropes.
He limits himself to those three plays, plus a few comments regarding Titus Andronicus

So recommended, at least for the portions relating to what Shakespeare wrote.

*A bit confusingly, his discussion about what is in Othello is not in the chapter ostensibly devoted to Othello.

[Madiel]

and that Hamlet uses the trope of the violent Black man in portraying both Claudius and Hamlet

...what?

[Mandryka]

Could you on this fair mountain leave to feed
And batten on this moor?

[JBS]

Could you on this fair mountain leave to feed
And batten on this moor?

Indeed. That line is part of the evidence he accumulates.

[Madiel]

Indeed. That line is part of the evidence he accumulates.

Then he's reaching.

[Mandryka]

Indeed. That line is part of the evidence he accumulates.

It's not easy to make sense of the text. As far as I know moor could only mean either an African Muslim or an area of grassland, though I don't have access to the OED. I don't think that the grass on a moor is necessarily poorer than the grass on a mountain. Just looking at this online concordance, Shakespeare seems to use this word 76 times, and apart from in Hamlet it's clear that he always means a Blackamoor.

https://www.opensourceshakespeare.org/concordance/findform.php

[JBS]

Then he's reaching.

That line is just a data point.
The argument links up repeated instances of how the word "black" and its synonyms (sable, dark, inky, etc) are associated with, on the one hand, Claudius and Hamlet, and on the other hand, with mindless violence. Hamlet's scene with the Players, with its speech about Pyrrhus rampaging and killing Trojans is an important link for the latter.

"...whose sable arms,
Black as his purpose, did the night resemble
When he lay couched in the ominous horse,
Hath now this dread and black complexion smeared
With heraldry more dismal."


It's a much more solid idea once you read the full thing.

[Madiel]

That line is just a data point.
The argument links up repeated instances of how the word "black" and its synonyms (sable, dark, inky, etc) are associated with, on the one hand, Claudius and Hamlet, and on the other hand, with mindless violence. Hamlet's scene with the Players, with its speech about Pyrrhus rampaging and killing Trojans is an important link for the latter.

"...whose sable arms,
Black as his purpose, did the night resemble
When he lay couched in the ominous horse,
Hath now this dread and black complexion smeared
With heraldry more dismal."


It's a much more solid idea once you read the full thing.

I don't doubt usage of references to black or dark. The problem is the last step of linking that to a particular label and claiming that Claudius and Hamlet are somehow being portrayed as being a different race. Shakespeare knew how to depict a character as being a different race. He did it in other plays.

[Karl Henning]

Disappointed. Indeed, borderline shocked that this Criterion DVD has bupkis in the way of supplements. Now, because our recently departed Simon reminded me of't: Olivier's Henry V

This was a fascinating experience. My reflex might have been to compare it with Branagh's, but that were unfair in any number of ways. Olivier was a superb artist of another time, in the first place, and such a film made for release during the War would be a powerful tool for morale (a nuanced form of propaganda, if you will.) Even as Shakespeare is England's gift to the world, such a film must be a potent example of what the fight was for. Thus, I take the decision to start the film as a kind of "this is how it might have played at the Globe in the playwright/actor's day, complete with spontaneous reactions from the "groundlings" as itself part of the film's mission. I find, therefore, questions of "which version might I prefer" utterly beside the point. The Salic Law scene is played as broad comedy, and (obviously) perfectly suitably. Before I watch with the commentary, I think I shall watch the RSC production.

[JBS]

I don't doubt usage of references to black or dark. The problem is the last step of linking that to a particular label and claiming that Claudius and Hamlet are somehow being portrayed as being a different race. Shakespeare knew how to depict a character as being a different race. He did it in other plays.

Perhaps I'm being a bit confusing. Professor Smith doesn't claim Hamlet or Claudius were Black men.
He says Shakespeare used the trope of the Violent Black Male which was already developing in Elizabethan theater to shape the audience's perception of those two characters by associating them with black, and linking blackness to violence.

[Brian]

Perhaps I'm being a bit confusing. Professor Smith doesn't claim Hamlet or Claudius were Black men.
He says Shakespeare used the trope of the Violent Black Male which was already developing in Elizabethan theater to shape the audience's perception of those two characters by associating them with black, and linking blackness to violence.

I understood this meaning but did not know that the stereotype was already being propagated at that time. Very interesting, thank you.

[Madiel]

Perhaps I'm being a bit confusing. Professor Smith doesn't claim Hamlet or Claudius were Black men.
He says Shakespeare used the trope of the Violent Black Male which was already developing in Elizabethan theater to shape the audience's perception of those two characters by associating them with black, and linking blackness to violence.

I think part of my difficulty is presuming there's anything particularly special about Hamlet and Claudius in this regard. Are references any more common in that play than in any other? That's one of the things I would want to know. Because to me there's an important difference between "Shakespeare did this particular thing in Hamlet" and "Elizabethans regularly talked this way". I don't think those are the same point or the same argument at all.

Associations with light and darkness are ancient. And certainly not confined to light-skinned Europeans either.

[Mandryka]

Perhaps I'm being a bit confusing. Professor Smith doesn't claim Hamlet or Claudius were Black men.
He says Shakespeare used the trope of the Violent Black Male which was already developing in Elizabethan theater to shape the audience's perception of those two characters by associating them with black, and linking blackness to violence.

When you say shape the perception of "those characters", do you Old Hamlet the dead king or Hamlet the prince? Either way, I'd be curious to know what he says there -- hopefully it's more than suit of sables.

Hamlet the prince is certainly violent -- he thinks he has been given a licence to kill by God. Old Hamlet was reckless, he gambled his whole country on a joust with Fortinbras.

[JBS]

When you say shape the perception of "those characters", do you Old Hamlet the dead king or Hamlet the prince? Either way, I'd be curious to know what he says there -- hopefully it's more than suit of sables.

Hamlet the prince is certainly violent -- he thinks he has been given a licence to kill by God. Old Hamlet was reckless, he gambled his whole country on a joust with Fortinbras.

Young Hamlet.
It is more than Hamlet's insistence on wearing black clothes (although that's part of it.) At this point, all I can say is get hold of the book if you can. (Just remember that the more original parts are where he talks about Shakespeare's use of racism, as opposed to where he merely uses Shakespeare as a peg on which to hang discussion of racism in scholarship and how people generally read literature.)

[Madiel]

Black clothes?

Right, so it's not because he's in mourning.