“There’s rosemary that’s for remembrance. Pray, you love, remember.” ~ Hamlet

Rosemary is one of my favorite herbs, mostly just because. I rarely cook with it, but love its scent and the wealth of history behind it. Known as the herb of remembrance from the time of ancient Greece, it appears in that immoral verse by Shakespeare.  My fascination with herbs plays a significant role in my historical/light paranormal romance Somewhere My Love, as does Hamlet, for that matter.  I always wanted to write a murder mystery with a focus on herbs and parallels to a Shakespearean play, and so I did.

A Modern Herbal by Maud Grieve, a wonderful source of herbal lore as well as practical information on the medicinal uses and growing requirements for a myriad of plants, is an invaluable guide. I have volumes one and two of Ms. Grieve’s work and can easily lose myself in their pages.  She refers to her herbal as modern, and in comparison to the ancient herbalists it is, but A Modern Herbal is charmingly quaint and published in the early 20^th century.

Available at Amazon:

Regarding Rosemary, she says,

The Ancients were well acquainted with the shrub, which had a reputation for strengthening the memory. On this account it became the emblem of fidelity for lovers. It holds a special position among herbs from the symbolism attached to it. Not only was it used at weddings, but also at funerals, for decking churches and banqueting halls at festivals, as incense in religious ceremonies, and in magical spells.

At weddings, it was entwined in the wreath worn by the bride, being first dipped into scented water. Anne of Cleves, we are told, wore such a wreath at her wedding. A Rosemary branch, richly gilded and tied with silken ribands of all colours, was also presented to wedding guests, as a symbol of love and loyalty. Together with an orange stuck with cloves it was given as a New Year’s gift…

In early times, Rosemary was freely cultivated in kitchen gardens and came to represent the dominant influence of the house mistress ‘Where Rosemary flourished, the woman ruled.’

The Treasury of Botany says:

‘There is a vulgar belief in Gloucestershire and other counties, that Rosemary will not grow well unless where the mistress is “master”; and so touchy are some of the lords of creation upon this point, that we have more than once had reason to suspect them of privately injuring a growing rosemary in order to destroy this evidence of their want of authority.’

Rosemary was one of the cordial herbs used to flavour ale and wine. It was also used in Christmas decoration.

“Down with the rosemary and so,

Down with the baies and mistletoe,

Down with the holly, ivie all

Wherewith ye deck the Christmas Hall.”

—HERRICK.

Rosemary Christmas Trees

Although an herb, rosemary is often shaped into lovely miniature Christmas trees. The plant is well suited for this purpose as its essential oils produce a scent similar to pine trees and it has a natural evergreen shape and needle-like leaves.

If you purchase a rosemary plant whether as a Christmas tree or for your indoor herb garden, remember it needs good light and moderate watering. Allow the soil to dry before re-watering to avoid root rot. The most common cause of death for potted rosemary is over watering. In spring transfer your rosemary to a clay pot. The clay will help wick excess water out of the soil. Fertilize monthly to maintain health. To this advice I add that you can also kill them by allowing the plant to dry out, so don’t do that either.

Because rosemary is native to the hot, dry hills of the Mediterranean, growing it indoors can be a problem. You may find you get more dense vigorous growth if it is kept outside during most of the year. Trim the plant periodically to preserve the Christmas tree shape.

Es madrugada, ya, otro día que corre bajo las ruedas desgastadas de los Nissan V-16 que hacen las veces de colectivos en el gran Santiago de Chile. Es época de elecciones en mi país, y la gente habla de todo un poco cada día que corre antes del 13 de Diciembre. Época de promesas. Me voy a dormir y a soñar con un arte nuevo planetario.

Cada candidato tiene sus recelos con el campo del arte, los presupuestos deben manejarse cómo corresponde, no es cosa de llegar y prometer para despues no cumplir y provocar. Ya tu sabes.

Cómo se puede guardar distancia de un fenómeno artístico tan brutalmente. En Hamlet, de Shakespeare, el brutal Claudio dobla sus rodillas ante el enfrentamiento con el arte que le develaba aquello que el mismo había puesto tras el velo. Pero aquí, entre mar y cordillera, entre el cobre del norte y el cemento del centro, entre el cabón de lota y las centollas y el frío del fin de los suelos, ¿Qué se nos dobla aquí ante el arte?

El tiempo corre cómo un animal desvocado, y los ruegos para conseguir financiamiento no han de encontrar siempre a un chascón ruliento, de apellido rezonante que venga y te ponga un fajo de billetes por delante, tú no eres Tomás González. ¿Cómo puedo dormir y soñar? Estamos en pañales.

Las donaciones culturales no son tales. El patrimonio no es asunto tratable. Qué cultivo de qué cosa. Que importante es educarse, constituirse, construirse y observarse. Conocer el entorno para poder desarrollarse. Analizar agudamente la tierra y a quienes la gobiernan, exigir y cultivar el espacio del arte en la comunidad que nos contempla. Hay que arar la tierra para arriesgar nuestras semillas, y pasan, y pasan los días.

Será la solución realizar y realizar pruebas? Es tan dura la condena de la filiación a la causa o el ataque contra ella? Podemos ser tan independientes y conseguir tribuna?

Qué paso damos con la libertad de expresión, la amplia convocatoria de los concursos de asignación, si nadie se entera de que formas emanan de tal o cual creación.

Los medios han de ser aliados. Cadenas de expansión de las arremetidas artísticas, de las prácticas culturales. Cadenas de cualquier tipo que mantengan al tipo a tiempo en los nuevos arquetipos.

Acontece, todo acontece. No acabamos de sacar la teta de la boca y ya estamos matando la vaca.

Me voy a dormir, sin creer en las tramposas causas que esgrimen los candidatos en sus propagandas. Tal vez los empleados públicos no pierdan su trabajo en el eventual gobierno de Piñera. La pregunta es si los artistas lo van a encontrar.

“The Tragedy of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark, or more simply Hamlet, is a tragedy by William Shakespeare, believed to have been written between 1599 and 1601. The play, set in Denmark, recounts how Prince Hamlet exacts revenge on his uncle Claudius, who has murdered Hamlet’s father, the King, and then taken the throne and married Gertrude, Hamlet’s mother. The play vividly charts the course of real and feigned madness—from overwhelming grief to seething rage—and explores themes of treachery, revenge, incest, and moral corruption,” begitulah kata Neng Wiki.

Kisah yang memilukan ini, diangkat sama Mr Kapoor sebagai Director dalam teater drama Hamlet yang digelar dalam rangkaian acara Festival Budaya India di Gedung Kesenian Jakarta. Ini adalah pentas pertama tim Mr Kapoor di luar India.

Menggunakan Bahasa Inggris berlogat India, agak susah untuk didengar, logatnya ga biasa saya dengar dan cepat. Kalau ngomongnya dengan kecepatan sedang sih, masih bisa kedenger. Ada satu pemerannya yang Bahasa Inggrisnya lumayan bisa berdamai dengan telinga saya, yakni pemeran Hamlet-nya. Dari mulut dia lah saya masih bisa mengikuti ceritanya.

Kisah tragis Hamlet ini dibawakan dengan kocak di panggung GKJ. Acting yang memukau dari enam pemain India mendapatkan standing ovation saat pentas berakhir. Salut sama sang Director yang bisa mengonversi kisah tragis Hamlet yang ditulis oleh Shakespeare menjadi sebuah komedi. Bukan pekerjaan yang mudah untuk melakukannya di mana Director lain membawakan kisah Hamlet ini dengan kesedihan yang mendalam. Semakin sedih maka semakin sukses lah sang Director.

Seluruh kursi di GKJ terisi penuh, bahkan panitia harus mengeluarkan ekstra kursi bagi para penontonnya yang kebanyakan India, bule dan tentunya orang lokal. Acha-acha… . Di sana juga ketemu sama Mba Lia juga yang suka jualin tiket kalau ada acara di GKJ. Tapi nomor hapenya udah lenyap bersama henpon saya yang hilang *hiks*.

Yang menarik di acara ini adalah sambutan. Ternyata orang India ga banci ngomong, sambutannya singkat dan padat macem orang Jepang. Atau mungkin sebenernya panjang tapi karena ngomongnya cepet jadi singkat… .

Dan yang kurang dari acara ini adalah beberapa kelucuannya bertema seks. Seks pasti bikin orang mudah ketawa. Director yang hebat adalah bisa menyajikan kelucuan di luar seks. Kalau Anda penggemar sitkom OB, nah ga pernah kan komedinya bertema seks? Itu karena Director OB-nya ga suka tema komedi seks yang umum dibawakan para komedian. Namun demikian, pada teater Hamlet ini, komedi di luar tema seksnya mendominasi. Jadi sayang aja kenapa harus disisipin komedi seksnya, padahal tanpa tema seks, penonton udah ngakak.

Directions: You are responsible for taking notes on Act I, scenes 1 through 3. Please take the notes on a separate piece of paper so that you will be able to use them for your potential open notebook tests/quizzes. Then answer the following questions thoughtfully and insightfully; try to understand each character as best as possible.

Act I, scene i:

1. In scene 1, the watchers response to the Ghost with awe and respect, as well as violence. How can you explain these inconsistent responses?
2. Discuss the meaning of forcefulness of each of the following images:
   1. “A mote it is to trouble the mind’s eye” (line 125).
   2. “I have heard…To his confine” (lines 165-171).
   3. “But look, the mourn …eastward hill” (lines 182 – 3).
3. Shakespeare was a master of diction (choice of words). What is the connotation and meaning of each of the following words?
   1. Stalks (line 61)
   2. frown’d (line 74)
   3. Majestical (line 159)

Act I, scene ii:

1.  What is Hamlet’s view of his own mourning? How does that differ from the King’s idea? How do you know? Be sure to reference lines.
2. What facts do you learn about Hamlet’s first soliloquy? How does this soliloquy explain Hamlet’s rude behavior to the King?
3. Why does Hamlet request his informants to maintain absolute secrecy about the Ghost? What does Hamlet suspect as the reason for the Ghost’s appearing in armor?
4. Why is Hamlet given four lines, all by himself, at the very end of the scene? (note the rhymed couplet)
5. Hamlet concluding speech (lines 273 – 276) is too short to be classified as a great soliloquy, but is interesting nonetheless. Hamlet thinks aloud and expresses some of his anxieties. Notice the repetition of the word “foul.” At this point, does Hamlet know how foul his deeds are? Explain.
6. So far, does the King seem to be popular with the members of the court? What evidence do you have to support your claim?
7. Give at least three examples of Hamlet’s use of irony, wit, and humor to deal with hateful situations expressed in scene two.

Act I, scene iii:

1. A major purpose of this scene is to introduce Ophelia. How do lines 2 – 13 and 48-55 clearly show that there is a warm relationship between Laeretes and Ophelia?
2. How does Ophelia show herself a dutiful daughter in line 141. Should she have spoken up and protested against her father’s ruling? What does her behavior in this instance tell us about her character?
3. What is Ophelia’s feeling toward Hamlet?
4. Lines 115 – 116 emphasize the word “honorable”? What is the reason?

Apparently I haven’t posted since early October.  Yikes.

But today there is news!  I had a meeting after school (well, actually, I snuck out a little early) with a teacher at THS.  He is a fairly young, fairly intense dude, and I like him.  He gave me some syllabi to look over and we talked about what the classes will look like and his “coaching” style with student teachers.  It all sounded lovely to me.  He teaches advanced sophomore English, co-taught junior English (this means there is a high percentage of IEPs, so a learning specialist is present), and regular senior English.  I have a list of literature to review or become familiar with.  Winter break reading?  Here’s the (partial) list:

1. Lord of the Flies - I’m pretty excited about reading this again.  I have only read it once, and it was in 8th grade.  I can safely say I didn’t get much out of it.

2. The Canterbury Tales – Only the introduction and two stories, thankfully.  I actually have not studied this piece yet.

3. Hamlet – Ah, Hamlet.  Read this in AP English my junior year of high school.  It will be good to review it.

4. All Quiet on the Western Front – a novel about a German solider in World War I (written by a German WWI veteran).  I’m very excited about this one, although I have never read it and don’t know much about it.

5. The Stranger – French existentialism at its best. (Also never read.)

Tomorrow is day three of my Anne Frank work sample.  Grading has been tedious but I’ve stayed caught up.  The hardest part was giving specific written feedback to every single student on the first journal entry so they will have an idea of what to do better next time.  Tomorrow will be fun – we are “speed dating” with all the characters from the play, and then we’re reading Act One: Scenes 1 and 2.

The worst part of student teaching is the work sample reflections.  There are a lot of best parts!  I have grown to really like the middle schoolers I have, even though I am still pretty sure I’ll like teaching high school more.

Das Geheimnis des Schreibens ist, dass es von der Anschauung lebt. Banal genug. Leider aber kommt an dieser feststehenden Wahrheit keiner vorbei. Auch die Sprache lebt von den Bildern! Da die Sprache jedoch noch immer keinen Zugriff auf die Bilddatenbanken dieser Welt hat, muss sie mit inneren, geistigen Bildern vorlieb nehmen, mit magischen, heraufbeschworenen Vorstellungsbildern. Diese machen gewissermaßen die Seele eines Textes aus, das Unverkennbare daran und dann und wann sogar wohl das Unvergängliche — viele von Shakespeares Wortschöpfungen, wie Jago, Hamlet oder Richard III, gingen spornstreichs in die kollektive Bild- und Vorstellungs-Welt ein, als wären diese Phantasie-Gebilde direkt aus der Wirklichkeit gekommen!

Solche inneren Bilder sind immer das Resultat von Eroberungen. Die Art, wie Hamlet nach den Worten tastet, beweist es wohl: “Sein — oder doch eher Nicht-Sein? Was klingt besser?”

Was ich sagen wollte. Im Zeitalter des Copy-Paste ist es ein Leichtes, Text-Leichen zu produzieren. Ganze Leichenberge sind mit ein paar Tastengriffen zusammen getragen. Das steht jenseits von Fragen der Entwicklung und der Komposition, der Differenzierung, der Affinitäten. Und darum geht es ruckzuck. Es ist eine Fleißarbeit und schafft Müllberge der Redundanz.

Hingegen muss ein Text, der mehr sein möchte als eine Sammlung von Fakten (von wem auch immer beglaubigt), durch die harte Schule der Anschauung gehen, im Idealfall natürlich der äußeren, als eines Wirklich-vor-Ort-Seins. Das macht die Wertschätzung aus, welche Reportagen immer noch genießen. “Was, der war ehrlich dabei? In echt?” Zumindest aber ist für den Schreibenden innere Anschauung unumgänglich, also Betrofffensein, Involviertsein, das gute alte tua-res-agitur. Man muss die Sprache in sich so weit bringen, dass sie von ganz allein an die Gegenstände heran, in die Verhältnisse hinein drängt und dringt. Die Sprache muss zum sechsten Sinn werden, mit dem man den geistigen Gehalt der Weltzustände erfühlt.

Was die Sprache, über ihre fünf biologischen Konkurrenz-Sinne hinaus, vermag, ist, auch das Seelenleben eines Atoms oder eines Superstrings zu erforschen. Denn die Sprache ist unvorstellbar gierig! Die Sprache ist darum die Meisterin der Mimikry, der Mimesis, der nachschaffenden Anverwandlung! Stellen Sie sich einen Tisch vor. Und nun sage ich Ihnen laut und vernehmlich ins Ohr: “Tisch!” Und? Sofort werden für Sie Tisch und “Tisch” eins, untrennbar, nicht zu unterscheiden. Nur können Sie den “Tisch” jederzeit in die Tasche stecken, beispielsweise auf einem Blatt Papier, wohingegen der Tisch meist bleiben muss, wo er ist — es sei denn, Sie ziehen um.

Mayor John Callahan and Charlene Donchez Mowers of the Historic Bethlehem Partnership welcome the Bethlehem Mounted Police. From left: Officer Timothy Brooks and Raven; Officer Jeff Mouer and Hamlet.

Demain, le Théâtre permanent de Gwénaël Morin joue la fameuse pièce de Shakespeare pour la dernière fois de l’année, à la suite d’Antigone d’après Antigone de Sophocle, et avant Woyzeck d’après Woyzeck de Büchner, devant un public nombreux et enthousiaste. Chaque soir, ce sont une quarantaine de personnes qui repartent, faute de place. Et pour cause…

Le dispositif scénique est pour Hamlet bifrontal : les spectateurs sont en U, sur deux rangées, U refermé par un rideau régulièrement actionné par un jeune homme en jean-baskets qui suit le texte sur des photocopies. Ce rideau est la sortie du théâtre, la sortie du réel, l’entrée du fantôme (représenté par rien) et de la folie. Ouvert, fermé, il encadre l’espace de son noir de velours. Les comédiens sont pour la plupart assis dans le public : le roi et la reine, Claudius et Gertrude, l’oncle et la mère d’Hamlet (Gwénaël Morin lui-même et Barbara Jung) trônent, l’un en pull bleu marine et jean, l’autre en robe de mariée enfilée à la volée par-dessus un jogging moulant et un dos-nu noirs, face au rideau, de l’autre côté de la salle, devant un écran de télé qui projette une version cinématographique de la pièce (probablement celle de Laurence Olivier de 1948), dans une mise en abyme drôle et réussie (quelques personnages s’installeront plus tard devant l’écran pour se regarder).

Donc, tandis que Laurence Olivier évolue en noir et blanc dans des décors classiques, des costumes d’époque, dans un registre tragique légèrement emphatique, Gwénaël Morin tire la pièce vers le comique et la théâtralité. Dès la première scène, trois acteurs surgissent en K-ways comme autant de capes sombres, brandissent des armes en carton, se cachent derrière des couvertures tendues desquelles dépassent les mains qui les tiennent, changent de rôle à vue (Grégoire Monsaingeon par exemple joue deux personnages différents, l’un sans lunettes, l’autre avec). La folie d’Hamlet (Renaud Béchet) est musicale : tantôt il hurle dans un micro accompagné au Fender Rhodes, tantôt il se roule par terre dans ses habits de deuil inamovibles. Tout de noir vêtu, il fait pendant au blanc d’Ophélie l’ingénue (Virginie Colemyn), laquelle finira dans une folie fleurie.

Enfin, le texte a été traduit et adapté librement par Joris Lacoste (l’actuel co-directeur des Labos) : on entend ainsi moultes insultes très contemporaines, et il est même fait allusion aux K-ways au détour d’une phrase, ce qui n’a pas l’air de convenir à un (faux) spectateur qui, lors d’une scène particulièrement débridée, se lève en criant : “Où est Shakespeare là-dedans?!”, avant de fuir la salle, furieux, puis de revenir à la fin pour saluer. Hormis cette aberration dont j’ignore d’où vient l’idée, et qui me paraît inutile, voire nuisible, le spectacle est non seulement cohérent en lui-même, mais aussi au sein du projet de ce collectif qu’est le Théâtre permanent, et en continue et développe la ligne directrice.

© Julie Pagnier

Le théâtre brut (selon le terme de Peter Brook dans L’Espace vide) revendiqué par Gwénaël Morin est ici particulièrement vivace. Celui-ci, quittant son rôle d’acteur pour entrer dans la peau du metteur en scène, donne quelques indications comme “rideau”, “noir” ou “entracte”. Il sort ainsi de la fiction et du théâtre, et nous en fait sortir aussi : lors de l’entracte, alors que les spectateurs sirotent un coca en feuilletant le journal des Labos, il déboule dans la salle en criant de déplacer une table, aussitôt suivi par Ophélie au désespoir à l’annonce de la mort de son père. Le spectacle reprend, on ne nous demandera pas de rentrer à nouveau dans le théâtre. La troupe utilise les bancs, l’escalier, bouscule et déplace le public, qui reste debout pour le dernier acte, surpris. Et ravi.

Les applaudissements sont énergiques, les bravos répétés et les yeux pétillants. Le Théâtre permanent mérite largement son succès. Il arrive à faire de pas grand-chose (trois K-ways, quelques notes au piano, une couronne en carton, un rideau, du ruban adhésif) un remarquable spectacle, dont la “pauvreté” est un tremplin pour l’imagination. Comme quoi pas besoin de richesse ni de sophistication excessive, intensité et inventivité suffisent, voire sont les conditions, d’un théâtre vivant.

So, Jedward are out. Does it matter? In concerns of life and death, no. Of greater importance to me is the recent death of my Dad, coupled with my Mum now being in hospital for the past two weeks. Is that though where the difference comes? People who are so concerned over the X-Factor results have had no life and death factor in their lives recently? Or is it a way of avoiding such concerns? Or am I too concerned myself? Is it a case of: “thou doth protest too much” as Shakespeare wrote in Hamlet. The complete quote being: “The lady doth protest too much, methinks”. Hamlet Act 3, scene 2, 222–230 spoken by Queen Gertrude.

Perhaps I’m worried about being sucked into something that would waste my time, when there is so much else to read or actually do. That I would end up liking the programme! Almost like an illegal drug. You know you shouldn’t take it, but loads of people you know are, so it can’t be too bad. Before long you get hooked. Such a comparison is not meant to make light of those addicted to drugs, yet I do believe we can get addicted to TV programmes, as well as TV as a whole. The consequences though are obviously not so damaging, severe, vicious or far reaching as drug addiction can be.

I hate, hate, hate people who look at movies–especially older movies–as just a step in the line to the movies we have today.  It’s a slap in the face to life, by extension, and I will explain why. (Foswi, this is primarily for you.)

I am a staunch historian, and I thoroughly believe in the value of studying history.  If you do not, you might as well stop reading this blog.  We’ll just never get along.  To that extent, is it useless to study ancient warfare in a modern context?  Are there no pracitical applicable lessons to be learned from tactics that defy era, technology, or weaponry?  I think you out there in someplacewhereyou’restaringatacomputerscreen should be thinking to yourself, “No, there is value in knowing that stuff…”  Because  you’re right.

Or, let’s think of this in terms of books.  Does it make sense to stop reading  Hamlet, To Kill a Mockingbird, 1984, The Lord of the Rings, Black Boy, Brave New World, Romeo and Juliet, The Giver, etc. just because there are the Harry Potter series, the Twilight books, the Time Traveler’s Wife, and various James Patterson and Stephen King books topping the New York Times Bestseller list?  Should we leave the past behind and only allow only what is new and pretty and shiny to be let in?

I think not.

The problem is the genre of film allows this to easily happen.  And many people who watch movies (or passively read about movies) tend to think only the little that is said without thorough investigation into the actuality of history.

Point 1: Michael Bay is awesome…but not really.

The Island

Michael Bay, as many know, is the champion of all things pretty, and mind-numbingly explosive.  After all, you don’t make a name for yourself with blockbusters like Bad Boys, Bad Boys II, The Rock, Armageddon, Pearl Harbor, The Island, Transformers, and Transformers II (directed all by Bay) without some level of skill.  I mean, seriously.  That’s an impressive list of movies, with impressive DVD sales, and everything.

But let us be honest.  The movies star nice looking people, blow a lot of things up, include heart-racing, adrenaline pumping, action and car chases (or meteorite destroying drill malfunctions, what have you), and fun technological advances.  They’re like James Bond films…just without James Bond.

These movies have made millions.  They have loyal fans of adults, teenagers, and children alike.  They’re fun to watch, made millions in the movie theaters.  But they suck.  They have no deeper meaning, make me thoughtful in no way, and generally make me dumber, because I actually could have been learning something while I was wasting time watching pretty people run around.

Point 2: There is more to history than just history.

Citizen Kane

A friend of mine (after reading a former post of mine) responded thusly:

I’ll disregard the opinion of anyone who thinks Citizen Kane is great for anything more than its innovative transitions and camera angles.

While said tongue-in-cheek, there is, I know, a part of him that believes this to be true.  And this is why I am angry.  I love Citizen Kane, in the same way I love Schindler’s List.  Sure it’s a little on the long side, but the story is great, the acting is believable, the direction is flawless, and the overall impact: unforgettable.

The ease with which Americans, modern people, I’m not sure who this list should (or actually does) include, forget the past when it comes to movies is disturbing.  Yes, movies are more entertaining today.  Movie from yore are a little boring.

Except that’s not true.  I defy anyone to watch The Apartment and not be complete enraptured.  Peeping Tom is one of the creepiest movies I’ve ever seen.  (If you have a Netflix account, I believe it is streaming live.   You should go watch it now.  Better than Drag Me To Hell.  Creepier.  Stranger.  More interesting.)  And you know what, It Happened One Night is the quintessential romance that cannot be improved upon in a modern way.  There are just old movies that age well, and have stayed good for a reason.  Citizen Kane is one of them.  Beyond the transitions and camera angles. (We’ve all heard the “Oh my gosh, there’s a ceiling” reaction.)  But let’s talk about the role the dining room table plays in the movie.  Did you ever think about that? Or how about the scene where Welles types out the rest of a horrible review of his wife’s disastrous operatic debut?  The acting is top notch, better than Sean Penn in Milk.

I am struck by many things.  Here’s a short list:

• People today seem so averse to watching older, or just pain old, films.
• People tend to devalue the impact of older movies because modern counterparts tends to be more engaging, which they equate with “better.”
• People tend to devalue the fact that most older movies have a deeper theme than most modern movies, even modern movies based in classic stories.

This is why the market for older movies should be booming, not dying away.  This is why people should actually sit down and become their own movie reviewer.  If you take the time to watching a movie a week, you’ll watch AFI’s Top 100 movie list in less than two year.  Probably less than a year, considering you’ve seen a lot of them.

Why is it people are so ready to agree, or disagree with the statements of critics and film historians, but are so rarely willing to make their own original statements about the movies themselves.  People, you, staring at your own screen.  Say what’s on your mind.  Be willing to say Citizen Kane sucked, but don’t you dare say it’s boring without backing it up.  I’m not about opinion’s with no evidence.

Just have an opinion, and make it your own.

On the eve of my third turkey-less Thanksgiving, I have one thing on the mind–gravy.

Year 1, I didn’t think ahead and went without. Year 2 I bought a mushroom gravy from Whole Foods, which was so excellent that even the turkey eaters added it to their mashed potatoes.

But because of my recent surge in culinary endeavors, store bought gravy just will not do this year.

I’m planning to do a gravy test Wednesday night (hence the “flights of gravies”), to try out a few recipes and bring the best to Thanksgiving dinner the next day. Hopefully you can freeze gravy.  Here are the contenders:

Vegetarian Gravy from allrecipes.com (tipped off by Mom):

Ingredients:

- 1/2 cup vegetable oil

- 1/3 cup chopped onion

- 5 cloves garlic, minced

- 1/2 cup all-purpose flour

- 4 teaspoons nutritional yeast

- 4 tablespoons light soy sauce

- 2 cups vegetable broth

- 1/2 teaspoon dried sage

- 1/2 teaspoon salt

- 1/4 teaspoon ground black pepper

Directions:

1. Heat oil in a medium saucepan over medium heat. Saute onion and garlic until soft and translucent, about 5 minutes. Stir in flour, nutritional yeast, and soy sauce to form a smooth paste. Gradually whisk in the broth. Season with sage, salt, and pepper. Bring to a boil. Reduce heat, and simmer, stirring constantly, for 8 to 10 minutes, or until thickened.(Prep time, 10 minutes; Cook time, 20 minutes; yield 2 1/2 cups.)

Roasted Shallot Brown Gravy from Whole Foods:

Ingredients:

- 4 to 6 medium shallots, peeled

- 1 tablespoon chopped fresh thyme

- 2 tablespoons extra virgin olive oil, divided

- 3 tablespoons unbleached flour

- 2 1/2 cups vegetable stock

- 2 tablespoons dry sherry or brown rice vinegar

- 2 tablespoons nutritional yeast flakes

- 1/4 teaspoon salt

- 1/2 teaspoon white pepper

Directions:

Preheat oven to 375°F.

Place shallots and thyme on a piece of aluminum foil and drizzle with a little olive oil. Gather up corners of aluminum foil to enclose shallots and place the packet in a pie pan.

Bake for 15 to 20 minutes or until shallots are soft when gently squeezed. Let cool.

Transfer to a blender or food processor, sprinkle flour over shallots and process 1 minute. Add vegetable stock, sherry, yeast flakes, salt and pepper, and blend for an additional 1 to 2 minutes to thoroughly combine. Transfer mixture to a small saucepan. Cook over medium heat while whisking constantly until gravy thickens. Taste and adjust seasonings as needed.

Vegetarian Cashew Gravy on About.com:

Ingredients:

- 2 cups water

- 1/2 cup cashews

- 2 tablespoons cornstarch

- 2 tablespoons onion powder

- 1/2 teaspoon salt

Directions:

Place all the ingredients in a blender and liquify.

In a medium saucepan over medium heat, heat the gravy, stirring constantly, until thick.

Add more water if the gravy becomes too thick.

Predicatably, Microsoft lost no time in slamming Google Chrome OS, telling Computerworld,

“From what was shared, it appears to be in the early stages of development,” a Microsoft spokeswoman said via e-mail.

“From our perspective, however, our customers are already voicing their approval of the way Windows 7 just works — across the Web and on the desktop, and on all sizes and types of PCs – purchasing twice as many units of Windows 7 as we’ve sold of any other operating system over a comparable time,” the spokeswoman said.

“The lady doth protest too much, methinks.”

Hamlet | Act III, Scene II

A few years ago I transcribed Ronnie Barker’s retelling of Hamlet from an old BBC cassette because I think it’s a riot; and, more even than Fork ‘andles and the Mastermind sketch, really shows off what a truly brilliant wordsmith he was.

It seems to be in a kind of extended or ornamented Hudibrastic rhyme, which ought itself to be used much more often as it’s fun, full of brilliant enjambments and startling feminine rhymes. Samuel Butler’s Hudibras, an almost consistently hilarious tale of an errant knight, made me laugh far too loudly in a silent bookshop with strategic use of the word ‘bum’. This (Part II, Canto I, lines 115-156) is fantastic:

No sooner did the Knight perceive her,
But straight he fell into a fever,
Inflam’d all over with disgrace,
To be seen by her in such a place;
Which made him hang his head, and scoul,
And wink, and goggle like an owl.
He felt his brains begin to swim,
When thus the dame accosted him:
  This place (quoth she) they say’s enchanted,
And with delinquent spirits haunted,
[...]
But if our eyes are not false glasses,
That give a wrong account of faces,
That beard and I should be acquainted,
Before ‘twas conjur’d or enchanted;
For though it be disfigur’d somewhat,
As if ‘t had lately been in combat,
It did belong to a worthy Knight
Howe’er this goblin has come by’t.
  When Hudibras the Lady heard
Discoursing thus upon his beard,
And speak with such respect and honour,
Both of the beard and the beard’s owner,
He thought it best to set as good
A face upon it as he cou’d,
And thus he spoke: Lady, your bright
And radiant eyes are in the right:
The beard’s th’ identic beard you knew,
The same numerically true:
Nor is it worn by fiend or elf,
But its proprietor himself.
  O, heavens! quoth she, can that be true?
I do begin to fear ‘tis you:
Not by your individual whiskers,
But by your dialect and discourse…

… and so on. Barker decides to make this form even more intricately difficult with the introduction of internal rhyming (as I’ve written it down, the first half of every 2nd and 4th line).

—

Here, in its entirety, with a few possible errors in transcription, Hamlet — as read and (I’m assuming) re-written by Ronnie Barker:

In olden Scandinavia, when standards of behaviour
were rather lax, and Income Tax was tuppence in the ducat,
Denmark’s democratic king one day became a static king:
he went to rest; became non est — in fact, he kicked the bucket.

He had, it seems, been victimized. The reason for his quick demise
developed from a charming trick of brother Claud, the thug
who, while the king was sleeping sound, came silently a-creeping round
and dropped a deadly poison in the royal Danish lug.

Then to the Queen, a flirty gal, he whispered: “Listen, Gertie gal:
now I’m the king and everything, we might as well be one.
So, when we’ve had the funeral (or even rather sooner’ll
just suit me fine) — oh Gert, be mine!” Gert said: “It might be fun.”

The former king had had a lad called Hamlet, and a sadder lad
you never saw — a royal bore, an autocratic [?] dope.
In introspective reverie, he’d spend his day forever; he
could think of nothing better than to sit around and mope.

One night upon the battlement (or so the tittle-tattle went)
a ghost was seen in shades of green a-frightening the warders.
The sergeant, one Sebastian, said: “Blimey, ‘ere’s a nasty ‘un.
Go fetch the prince, this ‘ere’s against the current Standin’ Orders.”

When Hamlet came, the fear he’d had all vanished as his eerie dad
told how he’d died. Young Hamlet cried — and not without a wince —
“Put poison up your ear’ole, Dad? Then I’ll avenge you, dear old Dad!”
“Thank you kindly,” cried the phantom. “Not at all,” replied the prince.

“I’ll sham,” he said, “delirium, and worry ‘em and weary ‘em —
produce a play; and in this way, suspicion I’ll dispel.
He went too far. As soon as he decided on this lunacy,
the things he did quite soon got rid of half the personnel.

While in a boudoir, chatting there, he said he heard a rat in there.
Ignoring the demeanour of the queen a-looking on,
he shouted, “For a ducat, dead!”, right through the arras bucketèd
and stuck a yard of rapier through his mother’s best cretonne.

His statement was eroneous; he’d done for poor Polonius!
— who, embarrassed, from the arras tottered out and sadly said:
“First to make a rat of me, then puncture my anatomy!
Call this a lark?” — with which remark, he hit the carpet, dead.

Polonius a daughter had, who reckoned that she oughta had
have wed the prince some ages since — but all he did was mock her,
by saying, “Dear Ophelia, I really feel you merely are
a silly slut.” — a cruel cut, which sent her off her rocker.

She chanted snatches sundry, sighed, went out into the countryside,
and climbed some trees, still chanting glees, a little off the key.
Alas! an envious slither there dropped her into the river there;
and, quite serene, she last was seen, a-heading out to sea.

Her brother, name of Laertes, imagined he could slay at ease
young Hamlet, with a poisoned sword which Uncle Claud had lent him.
But Hamlet soon discerned the trick, plugged Laertes, and turned the trick —
then made a spring right at the King and rather badly bent him.

Meanwhile a jug of lemonade the King had with some venom made
caught Gertie’s eye; and, feeling dry, she drained the poisoned jug.
While Hamlet, still rhetorical, got rather allegorical,
some phrases coined, then quietly joined his mother on the rug.

And while the bodies dropped around, Horatio, who’d popped around
to see the end, and superintend, came through the palace doorway
with Fortinbras, and legions of hairy great Norwegians,
who trampled in with pomp and din and seized the throne for Norway.

The moral of this story, boys, is don’t be Death or Glory Boys —
don’t try to rule, or maybe you’ll find you’re apt to bungle.
Don’t bother with detection, lads. Just stick to introspection, lads;
be kind, be good — and if you would, try not to stab your uncle.

Costumo dizer que se a partir de hoje nenhum novo livro fosse publicado, o tempo que me resta de vida não seria suficiente para ler todos os grandes clássicos da literatura mundial. Tendo em minha relação de não lidos alguns dos livros de Dostoiévski, Kafka, Shakespeare, Faulkner, Flaubert, Garcia Márquez, Homero, Thomas Mann e Virginia Woolf, só pra citar alguns, não dá pra perder tempo lendo Stephanie Meyer ou Dan Brown.

Meu primeiro contato com os clássicos aconteceu no começo dos anos 90, quando eu tinha uns 14 anos, através de uma coleção de histórias em quadrinhos chamada Clássicos Ilustrados. Eram edições semanais com adaptações de obras clássicas como Moby Dick, Hamlet, O Conde de Monte Cristo, Grandes Esperanças, A Ilha do Dr. Moreau, A Queda da Casa dos Usher, O Morro dos Ventos Uivantes, A Letra Escarlate, A Ilha do Tesouro e Cyrano de Bergerac (links para a versão .pdf dos quadrinhos de 1990).

Não consigo pensar numa forma melhor de despertar em crianças e adolescentes a paixão pelos grandes clássicos da literatura mundial.

Se você concorda e curte quadrinhos — principalmente adaptações de clássicos — vai gostar de saber que começou a pré-venda de “O Hobbit”, de J.R.R. Tolkien, ilustrado por David Wenzel.

Abaixo, 3 páginas de “O Hobbit” ilustrado (imagens de divulgação – clique para ampliar).

_______________

AVISO AOS LEITORES

O link da pré-venda de “O Hobbit” que aparece nesse texto é meu primeiro como integrante do Programa de Afiliados do Submarino. No entanto, a adesão a esse programa não tem como função gerar algum tipo de renda para o este blogueiro que vos fala: todo o valor arrecadado com as vendas — incluindo os valores gerados pelas compras que eu mesmo fizer — será convertido em doação de livros.

Achei que seria legal comentar.

In Jacobi’s Hamlet/Mother scene, there are some differences including no blood, thrusting on his mom on the bed, and the mother feeling guilty until Hamlet reminds her she can’t sleep with the uncle. I thought the no-blood and ghost were unrealistic, but what can ya do, it’s the 70s. I thought it portrayed Hamlet as crazy when he was thrusting because I don’t think a son would normally do that…actually, I KNOW a son wouldn’t normally do that. In Braughnaugh’s version, I really like Hamlet and don’t see him as crazy where as in Jacobi I don’t really like Hamlet and he seems crazy. Crazy how scripts can be the same but blocking etc. can change the whole meaning!

I also liked in Jacobis how the mom looked sad and like “Ok, now way” after Hamlet told her she couldn’t sleep with the uncle that night. I also liked how they did the lines about “I’m going to England you know?” better in the Jacobi version because she said “Oh, I had forgot” like she still loved him (with a sob)

The sesame street videos were SO COOL today I wish I could see more!

Open Response: Elaborate on the topics in 300-500 word responses for EACH category. Be sure to make connections to yourself, previous readings, and the world around you. So, you should have a total of three responses. Please know that the sub-questions are just guiding questions to help you focus.

This will count as a double homework grade and needs to be submitted to TURNITIN ONLY. I will not take hard copies. MLA FORMAT and Please submit by the start of class on Monday 10/23.

No exceptions! Even if you are absent, no exceptions. No student is here on Saturday or Sunday, so you need to submit your work before then.

Appearance vs. Reality:
• How do I know what I see is real, true or is it just a projection of my imagination?
• Can someone get away with murder by acting innocent?
• Can we trust our own friends?
• Are loyalty and honesty real or are they mere words?

Theatre vs. Life
• Or in our case, let’s say media…
• How much does one influence the other?
• Characters perform on stage, but do we perform in life?
• Are we all putting on masks of one sort or another, assume roles and put on acts?
• Do we mean what we say or think what we think because we want to or because we are told to?

Seeking Revenge vs. Being Loyal
• Where does Loyalty come from?
• Can we still be loyal with or without seeking revenge?
• Why do we need or want to get revenge?
• What are the effects of the revenge and guilt?

: forty thousand brothers Could not, with all their quantity of love, Make up my sum.

Shazam, a free iPhone application, helps you identify songs anywhere you go. Just hold up your phone to the music, wait 10 seconds, and Shazam tells you the artist, song, year, and gives you links to download it. You can learn more about Shazam here.

Three of ATS’s best Shazam discoveries of recent are:

1. “Back of the Van” by Ladyhawke. Location: NYC Jamba Juice

2. “Why Can’t I” by Liz Phair. Location: LA Movie Theatre

3. “Hey There Ophelia” by MC Lars. Location: Princeton, NJ