a knave very voluble;

Iago

Othello                                 Act II, Scene i     Line 241

And just like that, back to Othello. It’s like a roller coaster ride, isn’t it? Just getting whipped around from one place to another. 

Anyway, this time it’s Iago talking and I had some thoughts on this guy. Iago never once seems to say anything particularly truthful and yet constantly he’s being referred to as ‘honest Iago.’ It’s almost to the point where it’s incredulous. Like, what was Will doing here, and why have people bought into this play? Are we to assume the he had been something different prior to the time of the play, something good that grew a good reputation, and that just now he’s turned rotten (talking about Iago here, not Will). That doesn’t seem plausible because he’s just too rotten and too good at being rotten for that to make sense. 

In today’s Totally Random line Mr. Rat-Fink Iago is talking about Good Michael Cassio. He’s talking to Roderigo, who’s no angel  (and apparently no Einstein) either, and of course Iago is bad mouthing Good Michael. He’s calling him a voluble knave, which is an insincere, simplistic scoundrel or rascal. Pot, kettle, black!!! 

I couldn't think of anything particularly clever, so I'm giving you a picture of Edwin Booth (yes, John Wilkes's brother) portraying Iago. It's from my A.L. Rowse Annotated Shakespeare book. Apparently Edwin was quite the Shakespearean actor.

From all such devils, good lord, deliver us!

Hortensio        

The Taming of the Shrew                  Act I, Scene i      Line 66

Well it’s a good stand-alone line, and perfectly usable, and eminently understandable, in today’s world. In fact, all too usable in today’s world. But in the play I believe that Hortensio is alluding to the Katharina, the titular shrew. So we’re only 66 lines into the play (not counting the two scene induction – another story for another day) and we’re already seeing Katharina (I like to refer to her as Kate, as in Kiss Me Kate) being referred to as the devil. Well we could talk about the stand-alone line, or we could talk about the play. Yeah, you guessed it, I don't know too much about this play.

Well, that's not exactly true. I've read and listened to this one. I just haven't done it recently. But it's a good one, and it's a comedy. So if you're going to start getting upset that we're referring to a woman as a shrew (or the devil), well maybe you should at least try to take a look at more of the play before you pass judgement.

In the meantime, well, you can use this line as a stand-alone for any situation you find appropriate. Even Will if you're so inclined.

Agreed, not the devil. Just the same, someone that I might want to be delivered from. How about you?

He had two sons: if this be worth your hearing,
Mark it: the eldest of them at three years old,
I' the swathing-clothes the other, from their nursery
Were stol'n, and to this hour no guess in knowledge
Which way they went.

First Gentleman

 Cymbeline                                          Act I, Scene i      Line 58

This line is sort of interesting to talk about. This is two gentleman talking, and this is the very beginning of the play. They’re the first two guys to show up on stage, in the garden of the palace of Cymbeline, and they’re here to give an introduction to the audience. Oh they’re speaking to each other, one asking questions, and the other giving up the facts, but their only purpose is to give the audience a heads up as to what’s going on. It’s interesting because Will uses this feature in some of his plays to one extent or another, and in some plays he just skips it all together and assumes that you, the viewer of the play, know what’s going on and what the back story is. This particular line is telling us about the king’s two sons who went missing as a baby and a toddler over twenty years ago. As I said, in some of Will’s works we just skip any kind of intro, and in some we get a pretty extensive one like we have here. In fact, this is definitely one of the most extensive that I can think of. And one of the only ones where the introduction is done by two no-names who have no other part in the play. So what do you think about that?

I was thinking about going through all Will’s plays, or maybe just the comedies, and making note of which ones had this sort of intro and which ones didn’t. But I thought better of that exercise.

In the meantime, do you want to read the whole conversation between these two gentlemen? Here it is. This pretty much gives you the set up for the whole play. Which, I suppose is only going to be relevant to you if you plan on reading and/or seeing the play. So, on second thought, never mind.

Boy, we’re just not getting anywhere with this line today. Let’s cut our losses.

What do you suppose would be the intro by the two gentleman for this scene of Tarzan holding up a Massachusetts Emergency Management Agency pencil while the snow piles up outside?

   Second Gentleman-

                  So what's with the guy with no shirt and the big pencil?

    First Gentleman-

                  Oh that's just Tarzan. I believe MEMA hired him as their new spokesperson.

    Second Gentleman-

                  Ay, sooth!

            

Ay, and greater wonders than that.

Orlando

As You Like It                                     Act V, Scene ii    Line 27

And greater wonders than that. Greater than what? Do we need to know? This is from Act V, Scene ii of As You Like It and it’s an exchange between Orlando and Rosalind. I know this play, but not really well, and I don’t remember exactly what’s going on in this scene. I can tell you that the preceding line is Rosalind saying

Did your brother tell you how I counterfeited to swoon when he showed me your handkerchief? 

So apparently Orlando is referring to her pretending to swoon when he talks about greater wonders.  But beyond that I’m really not sure what he’s referring to. And do I care? No, not really. And if you asked me why, what would I say. I’d probably say that I’m not that interested in this line today. It’s true, I care about other things besides Shakespeare. To which you might ask, ‘You, Pete, what could you possibly spend your time on besides Shakespeare? Maybe watching television?’ And of course I’d reply, ‘Ay, and greater wonders than that.’

                                                                   Ay, and greater wonders than that.

For treason is but trusted like the fox,

Who, ne’er so tame, so cherisht, and lockt up,

Will have a wild trick of his ancestors.

Earl of Worcester

King Henry The Fourth Part I                       Act V, Scene ii    Line 10

Today we have hit upon a line that could easily have been picked unrandomly. Ay sooth, I suppose that unrandomly is not a word. But nevertheless…

I say that about today’s line because it’s a saying that can be used in any number of situations (especially within Will’s realm). So it’s not like those lines that are just part of a larger conversation and really don’t stand on their own; like yesterday’s line and for that matter like the majority of the stuff that we come up with randomly. So it’s a good line and its purpose is to explain a characteristic, in general terms, of treason, and it does so by talking about a fox. The Earl of Worcester is saying that unless the fox is tamed and locked up he’s gonna be a fox and  he’s gonna eat that chicken. So nobody’s gonna trust a fox. And once a loyal subject (such as himself) has been treasonous, no king is gonna trust that subject again. So they’re kind of screwed.

Now granted, treason doesn’t actually come up all that much in modern day to day living. But the simpler, more pedestrian form of treason, let’s call it betrayal, does. It’s pretty easy to betray someone’s trust or to have your own trust betrayed. And once you betray someone’s trust you’re kind of in that same boat as that fox; that is to say you’re not going to be trusted. So it’s a good line and it stands on it’s own. How about that?

This is Nutsy, and I think she looks a little like a fox. And as you can see, she's tethered so that she can't jump from the basket she's in. No, you just can't trust that little fox-like Nutsy.

Ay, sooth; so humbled

That he hath left part of his grief with me, to suffer with him. Good love, call him back.

Desdemona

Othello                                                 Act III, Scene iii                 Line 53

This is Desdemona replying to Othello when he asks her if that is Cassio who just left as he, Othello, was approaching. And of course it was Cassio. He and Desdemona spend a lot of time talking in this play. They’re talking about how Desdemona can help Cassio, Good Michael Cassio, get back in Othello’s good graces. I don’t remember how he got out of Othello’s good graces, but apparently he did. And I can pretty much guarantee you that he’s not going to be getting back in them any time soon.

‘Good love, call him back.’ But Othello will not call him back. And the more Desdemona tries to get him to call him back, the more he resists and the more he begins to wonder what’s going on with good Michael Cassio. It’s certainly nice to be able to read this line and understand what the heck is going on, isn’t it? Phoenix and Turtle indeed!

And Desdemona is such a pretty name. But being such a tragic character I don’t suppose it’s a name that’s ever caught on all that much. By the way, sooth means truly. So she’s saying ‘Yes, truly.’ I think that’s a phrase you could use in just tons of places.

‘Are you done with your homework?’

‘Ay, sooth.’

‘Did you have a good day?’

‘Ay, sooth.’

‘Can you say something besides ‘Ay, sooth?’’

‘Ay, sooth.’

Do I know why I've got my hands up in Svalbard as if someone's holding me at gunpoint? Ay, sooth! No, wait a minute. Actually I don't know why I'm holding my hands up in Svalbard. Nuts, that didn't work.

That it cried how true a twain

Seemeth this concordant one!

Love hath reason, reason none

If what parts can so remain.

Narrator

 The Phoenix and the Turtle                                         Stanza 12            Line 48

Okay, now you should see why I like the plays. For the record, I pushed the random pick forward a whole page because the page I randomly picked was a page of Passionate Pilgrim that was made up completely of non-Will materials. So….

Now, what of this Phoenix and Turtle? And by the way, from what little reading I’ve done on this I do know that we’re talking about two birds, the second one being a turtledove, not a shelled amphibious animal. Again, so…

First off, this is a one page poem with eighteen stanzas. The first thirteen are four lines each with an ABBA rhyme scheme and the last five are three lines each with an AAA rhyme scheme. Honestly, who came up with that? Will? So you can see above, this is stanza number twelve with twain, one, none, remain as the rhyme scheme. Again, honestly!

Further, what’s it all mean Basil? This reminds me of half of James Taylor’s songs; a lot of nice sounding words, but meanings? Well, not so much. But it’s Will, so I must be wrong.

So I found some interpretive works on this poem. I was just now thinking about putting some links here, but thought better of it. I tried getting through a few of these interpretations and, well, let’s just say that the interpretations could use some interpreting. Then, what do we do? 

Now it just occurred to me: I’m a reasonably intelligent fellow. No genius, mind you, but reasonably intelligent. Given that, what did the average Englishman of 1603 think of this poem? Did he/she understand it? Did they get it? Did they enjoy it? I wish I had him/her here to tell me what they thought of it. But I don’t, do I?

I think we might amend our page limit to 1250. I’ll have to give it some thought. Today's Totally Random line? I just don't know.

Since I didn't really give you much on The Phoenix And The Turtle, I'll give you a picture of The Noah And The Tortoise. And a nice warm summer day!