Task 50: Read all 37 of Shakespeare's plays, apart from the 10 I read years ago

Task 50:  Read all 37 of Shakespeare’s plays, except for the 10 I read years ago

The question everyone seems to ask is "Why?".  Do I enjoy reading Shakespeare plays (seems a bit weird) or is it some sort of penance?  Well, my reason for choosing this was that I happened to be listening to Desert Island Discs and the section where the guest has to decide which book he or she will take to the island, in addition to the Bible and the complete works of Shakespeare.  I realised that although these are regarded as fundamental to much of British culture, I’d never fully read either.  At school, particularly doing A and S level English, I had read a number of Shakespeare’s plays, along with numerous others by fellow Elizabethan and Jacobean dramatists, and I’d also seen films of a few more.  However when I counted the ones I had actually read, it was only 10 of the 37 in the Oxford edition of his complete works.  So, this seemed a natural choice for my list of challenges.

In prospect, I thought the comedies would be reasonably entertaining, the tragedies full of wonderful imagery and the histories a bit tedious.  Reading History at university, it was perhaps surprising that the only Shakespeare play I’d read as a student was Richard III.  I had thoroughly enjoyed it but the others were not tempting – and surely Henry VI couldn’t possibly need three whole Parts?  There was a large wodge of them and I anticipated a hard grind ahead.  This was going to be compounded by my decision not to look at summaries of any of the plays, so I would have to grapple with the language if I wanted to understand what was going on.

The reality was rather different.  The comedies tended to rely heavily on the use of disguises and scenes with rustic clowns, and some – particularly The Merry Wives of Windsor, The Comedy of Errors and Love’s Labour’s Lost – were little more than farces.  There were clearly a lot of “in” jokes which were lost on me.  The Taming of the Shrew was rather a disappointment, as it contained no striking language or imagery, and was redeemed mainly by the sheer vivacity of Petruchio.  I found Measure for Measure interesting, though, especially in the context of Shakespeare having married a woman quite a bit older than himself.  The two I most enjoyed were Much Ado About Nothing, set in Messina, and The Merchant of Venice.  The latter was an absolute gem – a well-balanced plot with beautiful language and penetrating observations of human behaviour.  These are the phrases and passages that particularly struck me, either because they have passed into common usage today and/or because they are so wonderfully written:

"it is a wise father that knows his own child ".

"in the end, truth will out ".

"in the twinkling of an eye ".

"All things that are, are with more spirit chased than enjoy'd."

"All that glisters is not gold".

"Hath not a Jew eyes?  hath not a Jew hands, organs, dimensions, senses, affections, passions?  fed with the same food, hurt with the same weapons, subject to the same diseases, healed by the same means, warmed and cooled by the same winter and summer, as a Christian is?  If you prick us, do we not bleed?  if you tickle us, do we not laugh?  if you poison us, do we not die?  and if you wrong us, shall we not revenge?  If we are like you in the rest, we will resemble you in that."

"green-ey'd jealousy "

"Do all men kill the things they do not love?" [Bassanio]

"Hates any man the thing he would not kill?" [Shylock]

"How shalt thou hope for mercy, rendering none?" [Duke]

"What judgment shall I dread, doing no wrong?" [Shylock]

"The quality of mercy is not strain'd,

It droppeth as the gentle rain from heaven 

Upon the place beneath; it is twice bless'd;

It blesseth him that gives and him that takes" [Portia, posing as a doctor of laws]

"A Daniel come to judgment!" [Shylock].

The histories were a pleasant surprise as they were nothing like as hard-going as I’d expected.  King John was the first and he was unlikely to get a good press but even so, his command that the young and entirely innocent Prince Arthur (arguably the true heir to the throne) should be killed by having his eyes burned out with a hot poker was rather a shock.  The sad tale of the weak and indecisive Richard II made much of the divine right of kings, which was poignant given that the English Civil War was to break out only about 50 years after it was written.

Henry IV Parts One and Two were lively as they portrayed at some length the dissolute youth of the future iconic Henry V – not just wine, women and song but theft and GBH too.  Part One has some genuinely laugh-out-loud moments, particularly when Hotspur is needling the Welsh arrogant windbag Owen Glendower (who fails to turn up for the fighting because he's had an unfavourable prophecy). Over the course of the two plays, Prince Henry matures into a wise, valiant and loyal young man, clearly destined for great things.
 
Part Two contains several well-known lines, including:

"He hath eaten me out of house and home."

"Uneasy lies the head that wears a crown."

Interestingly the Epilogue sounds as though it's to be read by Shakespeare himself.  It refers to his having had to appear before the audience at the end of a recent play which they were unhappy with, and having promised to come up with a better one.  He hopes this one meets with their - and his creditors' - approval and also says they will soon be able to see Henry V, in which Sir John Falstaff will feature again.

Henry V centres on how he defeated the French at Agincourt, despite his army being outnumbered five to one and his men and horses being tired and sick after the earlier battles in France.  He explains how sorry he is about the way his father, Henry IV, seized the English throne from Richard II and how he continues to do penance for it.  At the time the play was written, in about 1599, the issue of the succession was very much in people’s minds as Elizabeth clearly could not live too much longer and she had no children. It has some wonderfully stirring lines, particularly on the eve of battle, including:

"Once more unto the breach, dear friends, once more"

"Stiffen the sinews, summon up the blood"

"The game's afoot!"

"Cry, "God for Harry!  England and Saint George!""

"We few, we happy few, we band of brothers."

Unusually there is an epilogue which specifically looks ahead to the reign of his son, Henry VI, who lost much of what Henry V had achieved.

Henry VI Part One depicts a country plunging towards what will become the Wars of the Roses (although the phrase is never used in the play).  Henry has inherited the throne from his glorious father, Henry V, while only a child and reigns under the Protectorship of his uncle the Duke of Gloucester.  England is therefore vulnerable and although it eventually manages to defeat the French - who were aided by Joan of Arc, portrayed very unfavourably - internal dissensions between the major English factions are becoming all too clear.

In Part Two, Henry VI has developed into a pious and worthy man who would make a good priest but is unsuited to be a king, especially when civil unrest is brewing and finally flares up across the country.  The key women don’t come across well, especially the Protector’s wife, who ends up having to do three days’ public penance for her sins, walking barefoot on the sharp flints and filth of London’s streets, before being banished to the Isle of Man.  The focus of the play is on the widespread fighting and intrigue, emphasising the need for a strong and resolute monarch – a message that would have been very favourably received by Queen Elizabeth I.  The only quote which stuck in my mind was the memorable:

"The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers."

Part Three zips along, with further civil strife between the houses of York and Lancaster.  This, coupled with the weak kingship of Henry VI, leads to Edward Duke of York - an opportunist and generally bad egg - seizing the throne and proclaiming himself King Edward IV.  He causes instant uproar by marrying a relative commoner, who has come to him as a widow and a petitioner for her late husband’s lands.  At first Edward says she can only have the lands if she'll sleep with him, but when she refuses, he is so determined to satisfy his lust that he marries her instead - even though he has just sent the Earl of Warwick (who helped him get the throne) as an ambassador to secure a marriage to the King of France's sister.  Not surprisingly Warwick is furious, as is King Louis, and they launch an attack on England. 

The fortunes of each side vary, and we see Richard Duke of Gloucester - brother to King Edward IV, and the future Richard III - start his scheming to become King in due course.  He seizes the opportunity of Edward's eventual triumph to go to the Tower where Henry VI has been imprisoned and murder him, having already killed Henry's son.  Edward has a son, so Richard knows he'll have to get rid of Edward and his son, and his own older brother the Duke of Clarence if he wants to become King, but he's starting to lay his plans.

The last of the histories is Henry VIII, which Shakespeare wrote in collaboration with John Fletcher, probably in about 1613.  It is rather lacklustre and is pretty much a hymn of praise to the glory of the Elizabeth I and her parents, Henry VIII and Anne Boleyn (spelled Bullen in the play).  Anne is shown as virtuous and pious, and Henry as being genuinely troubled about whether his marriage to Katherine was legitimate - although it's also clear he is smitten with Anne.  This paeon of praise to them is not, however, at the expense of Katherine, who is greatly praised and portrayed as a virtuous woman and loyal wife who has been wholly wronged.  It is Cardinal Wolsey who is the villain, although interestingly he is portrayed as being a much happier and better man once he is cast aside and in disgrace.  Relieved of the burden of office, he can lead a far simpler and more spiritual life.  It makes one wonder whether Shakespeare was wishing he could spend more time in Stratford, enjoying the last few years of his life in relative peace and comfort.

Having finished the histories, I took a break for a few days before starting on the tragedies.  Coriolanus, Titus Andronicus, Timon of Athens and Troilus and Cressida were frankly all rather tedious, although Titus had the dubious distinction of being an absolute bloodbath from start to finish – rape, beheadings, entrails and tongue ripped out, cannibalism, hands being chopped off, etc.  Unlike Shakespeare's other Roman plays, Titus is fictional and may have been written to be in the same vein as the popular revenge tragedies of the period.  Although it was apparently popular at the time, its graphic violence was considered distasteful in later periods and it fell out of favour.  During a recent revival at the Globe, five members of the audience fainted as they watched one especially gory scene and first aiders had to be on hand throughout.

Luckily the next play was Othello – a superb portrayal of insidious jealousy and the destruction it can wreak, both on the person who is the object of the jealousy and on the person who is jealous.  Iago appears as almost pure evil, but he does at least have a motive of sorts: he has been passed over for promotion by Othello, who has appointed Cassio as his Lieutenant (who has no practical knowledge or experience of warfare, unlike Iago); and he suspects - probably wrongly - that Othello has at some point slept with his wife, Emilia. 

Othello too is not as gullible and unreasonable as he might seem.  He is susceptible to believing that Desdemona is unfaithful and lying to him because she did keep secret from her father her growing love for and then elopement with Othello; and also because despite her innocence and apparent naivety, she did behave with some cunning during their early days and gave him all the encouragement he needed to propose to her.  That's obviously no excuse for killing her, but it does help to explain why Othello is so quick to believe Iago's blackening of her character.

The language and imagery are outstanding: 

"Trifles light as air 

Are to the jealous confirmations strong 

As proofs of holy writ"

"I will wear my heart upon my sleeve."

"thereby hangs a tale"

"...  he that filches from me my good name 

Robs me of that which not enriches him

And makes me poor indeed."

[of jealousy] "It is the green-ey'd monster"

"...then must you speak 

Of one that loved not wisely, but too well".

After that, almost any play would suffer by comparison but Anthony and Cleopatra also contains some striking passages, especially Enobarbus’ speech describing Cleopatra seated in her royal barge, which burned on the water “like a burnish’d throne”. Other memorable lines include:

"My salad days"

"Age cannot wither her, nor custom stale

Her infinite variety"

"Be a child o' the time."

Finally I came to Cymbeline, the last on my list.  It was quite a challenging read, as it's written in a sort of Middle English which reminded me of wrestling with Chaucer; there are very few stage directions so you don't realise at first that the scene has switched to a completely different country; "Enter" can mean either enter or exit, which makes it hard to fathom what’s going on; there aren't always full stops so you have to work out whether the language has become even more obscure or whether in fact a new sentence has started; and the spelling of names isn't consistent, which makes it harder to keep track of the numerous characters.

Set against the backdrop of a battle between the British and the Romans, in the reign of Augustus Caesar, it includes a wicked stepmother, banishments, disguises, troubled love and a beheading – but a happy ending.  I don’t think anyone will complain that this is a spoiler, as I’d be surprised if anyone wants to read it.  I was certainly happy to finish it:

Overall I enjoyed this challenge and definitely feel enriched by the experience.  Some of the social history aspects were interesting, for example the fact that it was considered unacceptable for a gentleman to hit his wife unless she had done something pretty extreme.  I was surprised by the very wide range of countries the plays are set in, and by the use of different languages, particularly Latin.  Most of all what struck me was the variation in quality between the plays, from the workaday to the absolutely sublime.