--I say we must not

So stain our judgement, or corrupt our hope,

To prostitute our past-cure malady

To empirics;

-King

All’s Well That Ends Well             Act II, scene i     Line 121-124

Okay, this is a bit of a tough one and will require some re-reading of the line. Did you ever run into stuff like that? The stuff that you have to re-read two, or three, or more times in order to understand it? I’m not talking about Shakespeare, I’m talking about stuff you run into that was written in this century. And a lot of times it’s not because it’s got words that you don’t know (yeah, sometimes there’s words that you need to look up) but rather that the length of the sentence, or the structure of the sentence is such that by the time you get to the end of it you forgot where you were in the beginning and you lose track of the meaning. Like that sentence you just read. Sometimes when I run into that kind of writing I just give up. Sometimes I decide that I’m really not that interested in what I’m reading, or that it’s just not that well written. Sometimes I get pissed off at the author for writing that way. But sometimes I’m reading something that I feel is worth the effort. And sometimes I’m reading stuff by a writer who has already won my respect so that I’m willing to put in the extra time or effort. One really good example of this is Toni Morrison and her Nobel Prize acceptance speech. It’s a fabulous piece of writing that took me several times reading it to understand. I found that to be true of some of her other non-fiction writing as well (in fact I have gotten a little pissed off at her for some of the other stuff), but the Nobel speech is really a superb piece of writing. If you ever get the chance just google Nobel Prizes to find it. Oh heck, I’ll do it for you. Here’s the link https://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/literature/laureates/1993/morrison-lecture.html

But trust me, unless you’re way smarter than me (okay, yeah, that’s possible), you’re going to have to invest a little time in this one.

Anyway, the moral of the story (or of that long paragraph you just stumbled through) is that there is some good stuff out there that you have to work for if you want to get it. And that’s true of quite a bit of Shakespeare’s stuff. So let’s take a second (or third) look at this line.

First off I’ll tell you that I don’t know this play (By now you’re not surprised, and you may be asking yourself if I know any plays, and what the heck am I doing writing a Shakespeare blog. You can get a little bit of an answer to this by reading the ‘About me’ on this blog), so I’m going into this blind. There are two words that kind of threw me; prostitute and empiric. The first one gets a little confusing when being used as a verb and the second is confusing when being used as a noun. Further I think the second one might have a particular meaning in 1604 that it doesn’t have today. But the most confusing part of this line is the order, so let’s break it down. Oh, and by the way if you read the page leading up to this line you’ll realize that the King is addressing someone who’s come to offer a cure to his sickness. I don’t know yet what his sickness is, but apparently it’s an incurable disease (past-cure malady).

So I used the glossary that is included in my Shakespeare App, which I believe is from PlayShakespeare.com, and it told me what I had assumed, and that is that empiric is 1600 speak for medical quack. So bottom line, pretty much what the king is saying is that he doesn’t want to use bad sense and take false hope by buying into some quack’s advice for a cure to his sickness. But you probably already had that figured out, didn’t you?

Let me go, I say.

-Oliver

As You Like It     Act I, scene i       Line 66

So two days in a row with As You Like it. Perhaps this is a sign that we should spend time talking about this play? Okay, why not.

This is the first play that I ever read while listening to the Arkangel Shakespeare CD, and mostly I listened to it in the car commuting to work. It’s a pleasant little play, a comedy and it’s got the basic Shakespeare comedy elements; romance, clowns, girls masquerading as guys, etc. All that stuff. The five word line that is today’s Totally Random Daily Shakespeare is from Oliver who is fighting with his brother Orlando. But it’s not a real serious fight where someone gets hurt or killed. It’s just two brothers wrestling around. And Orlando does let him go. Orlando is apparently a good fighter because a little later on he wrestles a professional wrestler and wins. But as I recall, that’s about all the fighting there is in this play.

This play also contains the famous line ‘All the worlds a stage…’ but since we didn’t end up with that line through our random choice we’re not going to talk about it. Besides, there are plenty of people who have analyzed the bejeesus out of that line. That line goes on into a pretty long quote, taking up many lines, so perhaps we’ll strike upon it sometime in the future.

 ‘Let me go, I say.’ It’s got that quintessential phrase ‘I say’ in it. So totally British. ‘I say, old chap, what the devil have you been up to?’ It’s one of those completely meaningless phrases. Why on earth do you need to tell me that you’re saying it, when it’s quite clear that you’re the one who’s saying it because you just said it! ‘I Say!’ And don’t even get me going on ‘I’m just saying’!

Gentleman, (giving him a chain from her neck)

Wear this for me;

-Rosiland

As You Like It     Act I, scene ii      Line 238

Okay, pretty straight forward stuff here today. Rosalind hands a chain to Orlando and asks him to wear it for her. Got it? Good. Now, what would you like to talk about? We could discuss stage direction (or lack thereof) in Shakespeare’s works. We could discuss the different versions of Shakespeare’s works. We could discuss a personal connection to this line. Ok, those are my three choices. Or we could discuss all three. Since the first two will probably come up again, we’ll go with the personal connection.

Wearing something, a chain, or a necklace, or a ring as a symbol of love for someone is a pretty common thing in today’s world. And what’s more exciting is that my daughter called me last night to let me know that she was going to do just that because she had become engaged. So that’s pretty big news. Now I’m pretty sure her boyfriend/fiance didn’t use the exact phrase ‘Gentleman, wear this for me,’ because obviously my daughter’s name is not Gentleman. In fact, I really have no idea exactly what he said. But regardless of what he said, I think it’s pretty cool that this is today’s Totally Random Daily Shakespeare line. And it’s also pretty cool that my daughter got engaged because I think she’s pretty happy about it. So that’s a really good thing. Random indeed!

What need the bridge much broader than the flood?

-Don Pedro 

Much Ado About Nothing           Act I, scene i       Line 299

Okay, this is by far and away the best Totally Random Daily Shakespeare line I have come up with yet. I put it on the whiteboard upstairs and I’ve completely worn out my wife and son with the line already. It’s just fabulous and I can’t help it

Now, there is an inherent danger of misinterpreting Shakespeare due to the fact that there are English words and phrases that have completely different meanings in Will’s day than they do now. It’s possible to pick up a meaning that is definitely not what Will had in mind. And I am certainly dumb enough to make this mistake. I am no Harold Bloom or James Shapiro or even Mark Johnston by any stretch of the imagination. However, I’m going to go out on a limb and say that today’s Totally Random Daily Shakespeare line means exactly what it looks like it means. It’s just an idiom to say that we need only so much of anything to get the job done, and no more. Why do we need a bridge that’s longer than the river is wide? I’m not even going to get into the play today. Besides, I really don’t know much of nothing about Much Ado About Nothing.

So let’s see if we can’t come up with some ideas of how to sneak today’s line into your day. After all, shouldn’t that be one of our goals? I think so. So you’re working on an Excel spreadsheet with your co-worker Buster, and he wants to put in a macro that will automatically generate three pivot tables every time a piece of data is entered. You feel that a simple At Sum formula will do the trick. You turn to Buster and say ‘What need the bridge much broader than the flood, Buster?’ Buster is awestruck. Or how about this; perhaps you’re at home and your mom wants you to read twelve books for your summer reading assignment when the teacher specifically said that you need to read three books for your summer reading assignment. ‘What need the bridge much broader than the flood, mom?’ How can she possibly argue with that!  

Now, if you need something truly 21^st century on this line, just go to this website: https://soundcloud.com/julian-eaves/what-need-the-bridge-much

Here you can listen to a fellow named Julian Evans sing ‘What need the bridge much broader than the flood?’ and the next eleven lines in the scene as well. It’s not going to give you any better understanding, but you might enjoy Mr. Evan’s piece nonetheless.

And this gives credence to the statement that absolutely everything is out there on the web. In fact, there is certainly much more out there than needs to be. And so we could say in reference to the world wide web in general, ‘What need the bridge much broader than the flood?’


                                                  



I dunno, that's a pretty long bridge behind me. But is it broader than the flood?

May be he will not touch young Arthur’s life,

But hold himself safe in prisonment.

-Louis 

King John            Act III, scene iv  Line 160

Another of the history plays and, if I don’t mind saying so, it looks like my random system is doing a pretty good job so far as we have sampled 11 different plays/poems in as many days. So kudos to me (might as well, no one else is gonna give them). Anyway, of the 65 or so British Monarchs, Shakespeare covered eight of them in his plays (Of course 19 of the 65 lived after Shakespeare so it would have been fairly difficult for him to cover them). John is the earliest one he covered. Remember, even though he covered other historical figures (Julius Caesar, etc) only the plays about the British monarchs are considered Shakespeare’s histories. The rest fall under his tragedies. I’m not sure what the rationale there is.

So John, is that guy who’s pretty much always portrayed as the bad guy. He’s the King who’s trying to get Kevin Costner in Robin Hood before Sean Connery (King Richard the Lionhearted) comes back from the crusades in the end. He’s also the guy who’s such a bad ruler that the English people come up with the Magna Carta and force him to accept that. You all know what the Magna Carta is, right? That’s the document that gave power to the people and took it away from the King. Pretty important document that became 800 years old last year. But let’s get to today’s Totally Random Daily Shakespeare.

This is Louis, the son of the French King, talking to Cardinal Pandulph. They are discussing John’s nephew Arthur who is the rightful heir to the British throne and whether or not his Uncle John (clearly not the Uncle John with the band that Jerry sang about) is going to kill him. Louis thinks maybe he won’t. Actually, the scene following this one is pretty touching, Act IV, Scene i. In that scene Hubert De Burgh has Arthur in the dungeon and he’s been charged with burning the lad’s eye’s out, and there’s a really good back and forth between Hubert and Arthur. In the end Arthur makes out a lot better than Gloucester in King Lear (remember ‘Out vile jelly!’ when he’s getting his eyes gouged out? Now that is some serious Shakespeare!). Louis is at least half right in that Hubert decides to spare Arthur’s life and try to help him. Unfortunately the kid dies later trying to escape; remember history, not comedy.

So it’s a pretty easy to understand line for once. And with a little context it makes perfect sense. It’s not necessarily a line you’re going to get any current use out of. Not like ‘Well met!’ or ‘Pink for flower’, but then this is Totally Random Daily Shakespeare, not Perfect Shakespeare Lines for Daily Use. I’m not sure where that latter Blog is, but it’s probably pretty boring.

Pink for flower.

-Romeo 

Romeo and Juliet  Act II, scene iv   Line 53

So finally, we’ve hit upon perhaps the most famous, well known character in all of Shakespeare. Romeo! A character whose name is invoked in popular culture probably more than any other; ‘How’d you make out with that girl last night, Romeo?’ And yet, what the heck is he saying? Well, you have to read a bunch of the scene to give it context. But pink means pink and flower means flower. And I believe ‘for’ means ‘as in.’ So Romeo is saying ‘Pink, as in flower.’ Again, context please. We would need context if this were a quote from ‘The Bachelor’, because without knowing what we’re talking about it just doesn’t have much meaning.

So the context? Well I’ve read through the several lines around this one and it’s all just a bunch of puns that Romeo and Mercutio exchange. In other words, it doesn’t really have much meaning. It’s just not worth explaining the whole exchange other than to say it’s a fairly meaningless exchange. Hmmm, how about that? We’ve concluded that this line from Shakespeare doesn’t have much meaning. ‘Pink for flower.’ Meaningless. Now, having said that, I’m sure that we can find analysis of it (because after 400 years there is analysis of pretty much every syllable of Shakespeare), and there is someone who will explain how these three words are representative of the genius of Shakespeare (and he’s probably right), but I’m not going to go looking for that analysis this morning. I’m going to pass on it. I’m going to leave it up to you, dear reader (and I purposely made that singular as I’m pretty sure there’s only one of you). You can go into the text and read it. You’ll have a hard time with this. I can tell you that I have a copy of Romeo and Juliet that has a modern language, line for line, translation and I needed it to understand this battle of puns between Rome and Mercutio. When one of you writes in and asks for it I’ll print it. Until then… well we’ll just move on, won’t we.

Oh heck, no we won’t. Okay, here it is. At this point in the pun battle they’ve mixed up curtsy and courtesy and Mercutio says ‘Nay, I am the very pink of courtesy,’ meaning that he’s the paragon, or flower of courtesy. Romeo responds with ‘Pink for flower,’ that is to say ‘Pink as in flower,’ clarifying what Mercutio means with the word ‘pink.’ Then they go on further playing with the word ‘pink.’ So if you want to use today’s line in conversation (which I’m sure you’re tempted to since it’s nice and short), you’re going to have to wait for someone to utter a sentence in which they are using the word ‘pink’ for the word ‘flower.’ That seems fairly unlikely. Albeit not totally impossible. Wait a minute! Hold the presses!

‘In the pink!’ I’m not sure how I missed this. ‘In the pink’ is an expression used to describe something in very good condition, particularly as it relates to health (in the pink of health- in other words in the flower of health, or in very good health), and if you google the origin of this expression you will actually find a reference to Mercurio’s line, ‘the pink of courtesy.’ So today’s random line is not quite so random as we thought. It is the proper reply to anyone that you run into today who uses the idiom ‘in the pink’ when describing good health, or anything else in good condition. It will still confuse them, but it’s the proper reply. Of course, you’re going to have to find some old timer who actually uses that expression first. So I suggest you visit a grandparent if you have one. Got it? I didn't think so.

Which else would post until it had return’d

These terms of treason doubled down his throat.

-Thomas Mobray, Duke of Norfolk 

 Richard II             Act I, scene i       Line 57 

Here’s a little more context for this line:

‘First, the fair reverence of your highness curbs me

From giving reins and spurs to my free speech;

Which else would post until it had return’d

These terms of treason doubled down his throat.’

The single line (the last one above) really needed the three previous ones to make sense. What we have here is the very beginning of Richard II with two guys trash talking each other. This is Thomas Mobray’s reply to being accused of treason. He and his accuser, Bolingbroke, have been called before the King where Bolingbroke has taken the opportunity to call Mobray a traitor: ‘With a foul  traitor’s name I stuff thy throat.’ Today’s random lines is Mobray’s response to that. First saying that he can’t speak with full freedom out of respect for the King, Mobray then throws the treason charge right back at Bolingbroke. It’s pretty much an ‘I know you are, but what am I?’ response. And by the way, it’s Bolingbroke who comes back at the end and takes over the throne to become King Henry IV. So who’s treasonous in the end? And who’s mocking who whilst begging their voices (see post from six days ago).

Well I’ve got the fully annotated, with tons of analysis, copy of Four Histories that I used when I was taking a course on Shakespeare working on my MAT. It covers Richard II, Henry IV (parts one and two), and Henry V. These three guys ruled in succession from 1377 to 1422. And Will’s plays about them are more or less historically accurate, but always dramatized to make it a better show. Of course, with the way things went back then with overthrows and tortures and beheadings I’m not sure how much dramatization you needed to make it more interesting. And the Brits, by the way, are for the most part pretty up on their knowledge of the monarchs. They have some little ditty that kids learn in school that lists out all 65 monarchs that helps them memorize them all. So that’s 65 monarchs starting with Egbert in the year 802 all the way up to today’s Elizabeth II. There’s a song about the 44 U.S. presidents that I heard in a grammar school show once, but I know I never learned it. Heck, I just had to google U.S. presidents because I didn’t even know what the total number was. Oh well, that's the way the cookie crumbles.