I stumbled when I saw: full oft ‘tis seen,

Our means secure us, and our mere defects

Prove our commodities.

-Earl of Gloucester

 

King Lear                            Act IV, scene i    Line 20

Well I didn’t realize how good this line was when I first laid eyes on it, but I can tell you now that it’s a beaut.

And speaking of laying eyes on it, this is the Earl of Gloucester speaking who has recently had his eyes put out, so that he is quite blind for the first time in his life. He tells the fellow who’s been leading him that he doesn’t need him anymore and that fellow tells Gloucester that he’s not going to be able to see  his way. And that’s when the Earl comes up with this beauty of a line. ‘I used to stumble when I could see.’ He says. ‘my sight made me overconfident, and it wasn’t ‘til I lost it that I began to see what’s really going on.’ What’s going on, and what he is talking about, is that Gloucester has spent most of the play up to this point believing that his rotten son Edmund was a good guy and that his good and true son Edgar was the bad guy. But as he was having his eyes ripped out by Regan, one of Lear’s daughters, he found out that Edmund was a rat fink. So he saw the truth for the first time as he was being blinded. Get it?

In fact, this line in a lot of ways sums up the whole play. This play is about Lear not seeing the truth about who his true daughter is and relying on the words he heard from his two untrue daughters. Gloucester is a subplot that has the same sort of thing going on regarding his two sons. Both Lear and Gloucester have a heck of a time seeing the truth. This line says it all regarding both Lear and Gloucester. It’s the play in twenty words. There is no other line that we could have picked that would have done a better job of summarizing this play. It really is the play in twenty words. Honest and I’m not kidding, this is a Totally Random line. I certainly hope you believe me, even though you may want to see things differently. I would not lie to you.

See for yourself. This is my downstairs die that I use to come up with the next day’s page each night.

This priest has no pride in him!

-Duke of Suffolk (aside to Duke of Norfolk)

King Richard Henry the Eighth                  Act II, scene ii    Line 81

Pride. This is the second time in a week we’ve come upon this pride thing. Interesting.

We’re back in Act II Scene ii, same place we were in August, almost two months ago, the only other time we’ve struck upon Henry VIII. That time we had a most innocuous line, ‘Well met, my lord chamberlain.’ We didn’t get into any context on that one and I ended up showing you a picture of my Henry VIII pencil.

So should we forget about context again and just attack this line as is (remember, Henry VIII is a pretty much unknown quantity to me)? Or maybe even just kind of work around this line altogether. I have to say that there’s been a pretty wide latitude of stuff that we’ve come up with during this project. Some of the lines have been absolute gold. Some have been less than gold, but still good fodder for discussion. And some, well…

And this one falls into that some, well… category. I think in some of the cases of the some, well… lines I’ve been able to come up with things to talk about even though it hasn’t really been the day’s Totally Random line. But today, well I’m at a loss. I’ve rolled the die for tomorrow and I can tell you that tomorrow’s page is in King Lear and, whether or not we pull a good line, I’m pretty sure I’m going to be able to give you some decent discussion on that baby.

Right now though…

These two guys don’t much like Cardinal Wolsey. He’s a bit of a weasel and he’s got the king’s ear most of the time. And this is their comment. ‘No pride’ is not a good thing as far as these guys are concerned, so perhaps we’ll leave it at that. I suppose we’ll get into this play eventually, but for now I’m gonna take a pass on further discussion. Not the best post, I’ll grant you. I’m reminded of Arlo Guthrie near the end of Alice’s Restaurant. ‘I’ve been singing this song now for twenty five minutes. I could sing it for another twenty five minutes. I’m not proud…or tired.’ Well I’m not proud either. But I am tired. So let's call it a day.

                                                                   And let's call this Cardinal Wolsey. The guy with no pride. 

Not to kill him, having a warrant for it; but

to be damn’d for killing him, from the which no warrant can defend me.

-Second Murderer

King Richard the Third   Act I, scene iv    Line 106

Richard III, Richard II. Richard III… Yes, we keep going back and forth between the two Richards. Remember though, that there was a whole bunch of Henry’s and about eighty years between Richard II and Richard III, for whatever that’s worth. But for now we’re back to Richard III, the guy they found in the parking lot a few years back.

Anyway, today’s speaker is Second Murderer. I don’t make this stuff up. That’s the role in the play and it’s listed with all the extras in the Dramatis Personae (cast of characters); Lords and other Attendants; a Pursuivant, Scrivener, Citizens, Murderers, Messengers, Soldiers, & c.  Okay, it’s almost listed. We know that there’s at least two murderers because the scene we’re in has First Murderer and Second Murderer. Maybe there’s more elsewhere. I don’t really know. And I don’t know what a Pursuivant is. Hold on, I’ll look it up. Pursuivant—any guesses? Okay, a pursuivant is a royal messenger. There, you learned a new word today. And for the record, it’s in my modern Merriam Webster too, even though I looked it up initially in the Shakespeare Glossary. Moving on.

So Murderer One and Two have been sent by one of the kings to murder Clarence, who is a brother of one of the kings, in the tower of London. There’s a few different Kings in this play, Richard doesn’t start out as the king, and I have trouble keeping track of who’s who. So Second Murderer is having second thoughts about killing Clarence (who’s still asleep at this point) and First Murderer asks him if he’s afraid. To which Second Murderer replies with today’s Totally Random Daily  line. He’s not afraid of killing him because he’s got the king’s authority to do it. But he’s afraid of being damned for it because the king’s authority won’t help with that.

This whole scene is mostly a back a forth between the two murderers and then Clarence gets into the discussion when he wakes up. Clarence has a hard time trying to convince these two guys that murdering him is a bad idea. It’s an interesting scene and a very readable scene. Today’s line is a perfect example of Will getting into a guy’s head. He could have just had these two guys come in and stab Clarence, but he spends a whole scene with these guys (two of whom aren’t even listed specifically in the cast of characters). You should consider reading this scene. You don’t need any context other than what I’ve already given you. And I promise that the language is fairly understandable. Here, I’ll give you the link. It’s about 280 lines. Maybe ten minutes of your life.

http://shakespeare.mit.edu/richardiii/richardiii.1.4.html

It starts out with Clarence talking to Brakenbury. He’s a lieutenant who works in the Tower of London. The murderers show up around line 84 and Brakenbury leaves. You can even skip to that part if you like. Are you interested to see if Clarence can talk these guys out of killing him? You won’t find out unless you read it. C’mon, it won’t hurt you. We’ll finish this discussion tomorrow briefly before moving on to whatever Totally Random stuff tomorrow brings. Happy reading!

                   This guy is trying out for the role of Murderer Two, but I think he looks more like the Pursuivant. What do you think?

‘Tis nothing but some bond that he is enter’d into

For gay apparel ‘gainst the triumph-day.

-Duchess of York

King Richard the Second               Act V, scene ii    Line 55

Well this is a bit of a confusing little line. Let me set the scene. It’s mother, father, and son in the scene. The son, it turns out, is in cahoots with a bunch of guys to kill King Henry IV so that Richard II, who was recently deposed by Henry IV, can get his throne back. In this scene, at the family’s home, the father notices a piece of paper that the son has, apparently tucked in his shirt? The son doesn’t want to show it to dad, and mom is trying to tell dad not to bother with it and that is today’s Totally Random line

First off, dad notices the paper: What seal is that that hangs without thy bosom?/ Yea, look’st thou pale? Let me see the writing. So what’s the deal here? I guess the son has the paper stuffed in his shirt? Dad sees the wax seal that’s on the paper. That kind of makes sense. They go back and forth for a few lines – ‘Let me see it,’ ‘No,’ ‘Yes,’ ‘No’ – and then mom steps in with today’s Random Daily line. Ok, wait, I think I get it. She’s saying that the paper has something to do with a deal that he’s entered into for what he’s going to be wearing to the festivities. The festivities is either the celebration of the crowning of King Henry IV or the celebration of some recent military victories. Okay, let’s go with that. Mom says, ‘It’s nothing but a receipt. He bought some new clothes for the celebration.’

So young Duke of York has a document of a treasonous plot stuffed in his shirt and the Duchess of York is telling her husband, old Duke of York, that it’s a receipt for some clothes. Now eventually dad grabs the paper, reads it, and goes running off to tell King Henry IV, like any good dad would do. And that’s today’s Totally Random Daily Shakespeare.

Comments? Because other than figuring out what the heck it means, I don’t have much more to say about it.

I had rather be a country servant-maid

Than a great queen, with this condition,---

-Queen Elizabeth

King Richard the Third   Act I, scene iii     Line 107

For starters, and to be clear, this is not Queen Elizabeth I (who was in power in Shakespeare’s time) and it is certainly not Queen Elizabeth II (who is currently reigning and does not figure into any of Will’s works). This Queen Elizabeth is the wife of Edward IV. I believe that makes her the sister-in-law of Richard III. But again, I’m only up to Henry IV in my Shakespeare’s Kings book, and I don’t have a lot of familiarity with Will’s Richard III.

But what of the line? Without having to do much work I can tell you that the ‘condition’ the queen refers to is the ‘blunt upbraidings’ and ‘bitter scoffs’ of the Duke of Gloster. Apparently she’s not too happy with the way the Duke is talking to her. And she is, after all, a queen. Or at least she’s married to the king. There appears to be some difference between being a queen in your own right (like Queens Elizabeth I and II) and being a queen by virtue of being married to the king (note that this Queen Elizabeth doesn’t rate a number). Either way, she doesn’t feel that she’s got to put up with any lip from the duke.

So about this number thing; Not too many of us get a number. My brother, my father, and my grandfather are all Williams. But my dad and my grandfather had different middle names, so no junior there, and then my dad gave my brother the same middle name so that Billy became Bill jr, and not Bill the third. But now Bill jr.’s son is the fourth William, but with a new and different middle name. So is my nephew William IV??? Heck if I know. All I know is I’m Peter. Not Peter I or anything. Just Peter. And I guess I’d rather be a country servant that put up with the duke’s crap as well. I really don’t like putting up with anyone’s crap if I can help it. Who does?

But moving on from this number stuff, just noticed that the page I am on in my compilation today is 104, and page 105 has the Totally Random line for blog post #5, way back a month and a half ago. Remember, that line about ‘the foulest deed to slay that babe’, that babe that we never quite figured out who it was? Well apparently that babe was 17 year old Edward of Westminster, son of Henry VI. Apparently Richard III is being held responsible for killing this kid (hardly a babe). It gets all the more confusing because Will manages to conflate a lot of the historical facts in the process of his history plays. If I ever get to the end of Shakespeare’s Kings I’m pretty sure I'll have it all figured out, but right now I'm still more than a bit confused. But I’ll certainly keep you posted.

                                             

And, commendable proved, let’s die in pride.

-Lord Talbot

King Henry the Sixth Part I                          Act IV, scene vii Line 58

And cut! Yes, that’s the last line of the scene, followed by the stage direction ‘Exeunt’, which I learned is the plural of ‘Exit’. So if it says ‘Exit’ it means one person is leaving, and if it says ‘Exeunt’ it means everybody out. So Exeunt usually means it’s the end of the scene, but not always.

First off, let me report that I am certainly making progress in reading Shakespeare’s Kings. Second I’ll tell you that this progress includes getting up to King Henry IV, but unfortunately not Henry VI. And since I’ve not added Shakespeare’s Henry VI, Part I, II, or III to the plays that I’ve read, well, you guessed it, I really don’t know what’s going on with this line too much. But it’s a short scene, and I read it, so I can give you the micro context, if not the macro version.

The scene includes Lord Talbot, today’s speaker, and his son John Talbot. They are caught up in the middle of a battle (I believe the Talbots are English and they’re fighting the French), and the two Talbots are discussing the merits of the younger one hightailing it out of there while he still can. Apparently the battle’s not going all that well for the English, and sticking it out may not work out that well for either of them. In the end though, they both agree that they’ll stick it out together whatever the outcome and thus Father Talbot’s line in today’s Totally Random Daily Shakespeare. And commendable proved, let’s die in pride. Not terribly optimistic, but I guess you can say it’s a positive attitude. I mean, if they’re gonna go, they might as well go together as opposed to apart and running away like cowards. Just the same, I think getting killed in war is a little over-rated.

So today’s line doesn’t quite have the cachet Oh world, thy slippery turns! Yeah, that’s right, I’m still stuck on that one. Honestly, I think it’s right up there with What need the bridge much wider than the flood. In fact, it might even be better. Can’t seem to get past it. In any event, at least I got you back to a manageable line today. One line, seven words, as opposed to yesterday’s epistle. So let’s just let it go at that. You decide if today’s line is worth anything. In the meantime, I’m moving on.

O world, thy slippery turns! Friends now fast sworn,

Whose double bosoms seems to wear one heart,

Whose hours, whose bed, whose meal, and exercise,

Are still together, who twin, as ‘twere, in love

Unseparable, shall within this hour,

On a dissension of a doit, break out

To bitterest enmity: so, fellest foes,

Whose passions and whose plots have broke their sleep

To take the one the other, by some chance,

Some trick not worth an egg, shall grow dear friends

And interjoin their issues. So with me:

My birth-place hate I, and my love’s upon

This enemy town. –I’ll enter: if he slay me,

He does fair justice; if he give me way,

I’ll do his country service.

 

 -Caius Marcius Coriolanus

Coriolanus                          Act IV, scene iv Line 12-26

Okay kids, I really did it to you today. I know, you’re saying ‘wait a minute, this is supposed to be a line of Shakespeare. A line!’ Well you’re right. But on the other hand it’s called Totally Random Daily Shakespeare, so there’s nowhere in the title that says ‘a line’. Nonetheless, I’ll explain.

Today’s Random line landed me right in the middle of a pretty long sentence, the one where he’s talking about his friends becoming enemies. So I couldn’t give you the line without the whole sentence. And that sentence was really almost inseparable (or as Caius would say, ‘unseparable’) from the next sentence where he talked about his enemies, fellest foes, becoming his friends, interjoin their issues. And those since those two long sentences made up ninety percent of this brief soliloquy, well I decided to give you the whole thing. I knew you’d understand.

Now, what’s it all about? Well, it seems that Caius Marcius Coriolanus (that’s a hell of a name, isn’t it? And the best part is that it ends in ‘anus’ so you know if you teach this in a high school class one of the guys is gonna pick up on that and use it somehow to have some fun with it. I’ll let you see what you can do with that on your own) has been banished from his country and so has decided to effectively defect to the enemy and see if they want him to fight for them. You can look at the posts from 8/13, 9/4, and 9/28 (just go to Coriolanus in the Will's Works tab) for some more details on the play. But anyway, today’s Totally Random lines are from Marcius as he is standing alone outside the house of his enemy, in his enemy’s country. He’s about to go inside and see if they want him to fight for them, or if they’ll just want to kill him. I particularly like the very beginning of the speech where he’s commenting on the capriciousness of fate: Oh world, thy slippery turns! That is just absolutely fabulous language, isn’t it? I worked with a high school teacher once and she was talking about teaching Shakespeare to high school kids. She said that a lot of Shakespeare was pretty tough to teach, and she’s not sure how much they understood or appreciated it. But she was sure it was worth it just to expose them to the beauty of Shakespeare’s language. I wasn’t quite sure I understood or agreed with her then, but I most certainly do agree with her now.

Okay, I’m still stuck on that line. Oh world, thy slippery turns! I can’t go any further today. I’m just going to take those five words, consider myself blessed, and move on with my day. No pic today. You don't need one with a line this great.