Collins Unbound

In honor of William Shakespeare we are celebrating the 400th anniversary of his death on April 23, 2016. What better way to do this, than by highlighting the writing done by first-year students in Associate Professor of English John Wesley’s first-year seminar, A Year in the Life of William Shakespeare? This first-year seminar in scholarly inquiry studies four remarkable plays Shakespeare wrote or saw into production in 1599, the same year he opened the Globe Theatre. In the first half of the course, students were introduced to the myriad ways in which Shakespeare’s 1599 plays are shaped by and give shape to the political and cultural intrigues of that year. In the second half of the course, students turned to a play (and year) of their own choosing, the historicist analysis of which is the basis of an independent research project. As part of this project, students were asked to prepare a blog post that reflected on aspects of Shakespeare’s life, a specific work, or a resource or organization associated with Shakespeare, or to provide a personal interpretation of a play. During the month of April, we’ll feature the posts from students that celebrate all things Shakespeare!

Congratulations to our wonderful first-year writers. For additional online resources about Shakespeare, check out these sites:

• British Library: http://www.bl.uk/
• Folger Shakespeare Library: http://www.folger.edu/
• Globe Theatre: http://www.shakespearesglobe.com
• Internet Shakespeare Editions: http://internetshakespeare.uvic.ca
• Shakespeare 400:  http://www.shakespeare400.org/

Shakespeare in Plague-Ridden London
By Lindsey Rachel Hunt

Source: Wikimedia Commons

William Shakespeare died 400 years ago, in April of 2016. But, thanks to the plague’s many sweeps through London, he could have actually died much, much sooner. While the plague hit London particularly hard in 1665, it actually struck the city fairly hard in 1592-93, 1603, and 1606 (British Medical Journal). The plague was explained with a variety of unusual causes; sinning, foul or sick air, the alignment of the planets, and imbalances of the four humors that were believed at the time to control the physical health and emotional well-being of humans (British Medical Journal). Symptoms of the plague included a high fever, severe joint pain, thirst, delirium, heart failure, and the swelling and then rupturing of lymphs located in the groin, neck, and armpits (Shapiro).

Despite the plague’s high contagiousness and terrifying symptoms, life in Elizabethan England went on. Whenever the plague would ramp up the death count, privy councilors in charge of maintaining quarantines would complain that “too many Londoners were washing off the red crosses painted over the doors of their infected and quarantined households.” (Shapiro) Londoners were also much more likely to break rules and London descended into chaos during bouts of plague; law enforcement had to sit tight, and magistrates and (ironically enough) physicians left the city (British Medical Journal). After 1603 experienced an “outbreak in which more than 30,000 Londoners had died, the privy council decreed that public playing should cease once the number of those who died every week of plague rose ‘above the number of 30’.” (Shapiro) Players frequently disregarded this decree, choosing instead to keep their theaters open even when the death count was nearing 40. When the death toll was as high as it got to in 1603 or 1606, however, the playhouses remained closed. Some historians actually claim that “there is a close correlation between the closure of the playhouses and Shakespeare’s writing habits,” arguing that Shakespeare practically ceased writing altogether whenever the plague took more victims (Shakespeare Quarterly). The idea that outside circumstances heavily influenced Shakespeare’s creative output is not a foreign concept; in the SSI-2 class A Year in the Life of William Shakespeare, we frequently compare real-world events in the year 1599 to the plays Shakespeare produced during that time period.

While we will never really fully know why Shakespeare chose not to write plays during theater closures, we do know that Shakespeare lived in a part of the city that, for the majority of the outbreaks, remained relatively safe from the plague. Shakespeare lived in the parish of St. Olave’s of Silver Street, which, in the plague-ridden years of 1592, 1593, and 1603, remained relatively unaffected by the rest of the city’s illness and panic. It wasn’t until 1606 that plague seemed to have struck Shakespeare’s community. There’s even a chance that Shakespeare’s landlady was affected, although the vicar, Flint, “listed only the date and the deceased’s name and occupation…Flint sometimes included a stray detail, [but] his entries are brief,” so she could have died from other causes (Shapiro). Even so, the plague was too close to Shakespeare for comfort.

If the plague had touched Shakespeare in 1606, some of his most notable plays, like Winter’s Tale (1610) and The Tempest (1611), would never have existed. In a lecture Dr. Wesley gave during my Orientation the previous semester, I learned that Shakespeare was educated primarily with morality plays. Morality plays had simple characters that represented moral concepts that needed to be reinforced. These morality plays were commonly shown in theaters along with a variety of simple, silly plays; as a result, theater wasn’t taken seriously. An exceptionally hard worker like Shakespeare was needed to change the purpose of going to the theater from simple entertainment to a provocative learning experience. While another playwright could have emerged and taken Shakespeare’s place in the annuls of history, I’m glad Shakespeare survived to write his sonnets and plays. Since you’re reading this, I’m sure you are too.

Bibliography

“The Plague in Shakespeare’s London”. “The Plague in Shakespeare’s London”. The British Medical Journal 1.3187 (1922): 156–156. Web…

Book reviews – politics, plague, and shakespeare’s theater: (1993). Shakespeare Quarterly, 44(1), 100. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.ups.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1811840?accountid=1627

Shapiro, James. How Shakespeare’s great escape from the plague changed theatre The Guardian.com, 24 September, 2015. Web. Accessed 1 March, 2016. http://www.theguardian.com/books/2015/sep/24/shakespeares-great-escape-plague-1606–james-shapiro

In honor of William Shakespeare we are celebrating the 400th anniversary of his death on April 23, 2016. What better way to do this, than by highlighting the writing done by first-year students in Associate Professor of English John Wesley’s first-year seminar, A Year in the Life of William Shakespeare? This first-year seminar in scholarly inquiry studies four remarkable plays Shakespeare wrote or saw into production in 1599, the same year he opened the Globe Theatre. In the first half of the course, students were introduced to the myriad ways in which Shakespeare’s 1599 plays are shaped by and give shape to the political and cultural intrigues of that year. In the second half of the course, students turned to a play (and year) of their own choosing, the historicist analysis of which is the basis of an independent research project. As part of this project, students were asked to prepare a blog post that reflected on aspects of Shakespeare’s life, a specific work, or a resource or organization associated with Shakespeare, or to provide a personal interpretation of a play. During the month of April, we’ll feature the posts from students that celebrate all things Shakespeare!

Congratulations to our wonderful first-year writers. For additional online resources about Shakespeare, check out these sites:

• British Library: http://www.bl.uk/
• Folger Shakespeare Library: http://www.folger.edu/
• Globe Theatre: http://www.shakespearesglobe.com
• Internet Shakespeare Editions: http://internetshakespeare.uvic.ca
• Shakespeare 400:  http://www.shakespeare400.org/

Shakespeare vs. Controversy
By Annelise Bauer

Dear readers,

As many of you know, Shakespeare is a great playwright whose work is timeless. With every great writer come fame, praise, and controversy. In the Elizabethan time, the royal court was very serious about the kinds of content that was allowed to be in literature. Every piece that Shakespeare wrote had to be screened before it could be preformed. If there was anything that might offend the royal court in the script it had to be taken out. Since Shakespeare enjoyed writing political plays, he had to be extremely careful about what it was that he wrote about. Also, because so many people went to see Shakespeare’s plays, if there was something in them that offended the royal court the common people may think it is okay to say things like that. If anyone, no matter who it was, said something that insulted the queen she would have him or her killed.

Shakespeare was loved at his time but with some of his plays brought controversy. With a few, if they were written by anybody else may have caused problems in society and with the royal court but somehow Shakespeare knew how to get around that. Lawrence Manley states that during the Elizabethan time, “Theatrical performances were ‘liminal’ in nature, capable of accommodating contradictory states of affairs through the resources of mimicry and parodic inversion, and they assumed the license to express and debate matters normally taken for granted” (The Elizabethan World 532). Shakespeare was really good at writing political plays that raised debate within the play about things that were happening during that time without causing issues outside of the play. For instance, Henry V is a debate play. It debates war and the effects of war and brings in ideas from the time of conflicts between England and France.

Not only did Shakespeare have to be careful about the content he wrote about but he also had to be aware of the names of the characters in his plays. James Shapiro wrote in his book “A Year in the Life of Shakespeare,” that when Shakespeare wrote Henry IV he originally had Falstaff’s character named Oldcastle. Shapiro says, “It’s hard from a distance to determine whether the initial slight was intentional on Shakespeare’s part, an attempt to poke fun at a Puritan hero like Oldcastle or a sly dig that aligned Shakespeare with court factions opposed to Cobham and his son” (Shapiro 17). Falstaff’s character is a jokester and not a character that a person such as Oldcastle would want to be associated with. If he had not changed the name there would have been havoc among the commoners and the royal court.

Picture of William Shakespeare (Shakespeare’s Biography)

In conclusion, Theater opened up a new way of discussing controversial ideas without actually bringing up the specific problems at hand. Lawrence Manley says, “where theatre is concerned, the most crucial license was the permission to enact disturbing events and situations – tragic conflicts, failed transitions, political divisions, controversial ideas – too dangerous to contemplate in public view outside the framework of licensed hypothesis” (The Elizabethan World 532). I believe that Shakespeare opened up new room for people to converse and debate issues of their time without having to worry about offending anything.

Bibliography

Doran, Susan, and Norman L. Jones. The Elizabethan World. Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge, 2011. Print.

Shapiro, James. A Year in the Life of William Shakespeare, 1599. New York: HarperCollins, 2005. Print.

“Shakespeare’s Biography.” Shakespeare Resource Center . N.p., n.d. Web. 02 Mar. 2016.

In honor of William Shakespeare we are celebrating the 400th anniversary of his death on April 23, 2016. What better way to do this, than by highlighting the writing done by first-year students in Associate Professor of English John Wesley’s first-year seminar, A Year in the Life of William Shakespeare? This first-year seminar in scholarly inquiry studies four remarkable plays Shakespeare wrote or saw into production in 1599, the same year he opened the Globe Theatre. In the first half of the course, students were introduced to the myriad ways in which Shakespeare’s 1599 plays are shaped by and give shape to the political and cultural intrigues of that year. In the second half of the course, students turned to a play (and year) of their own choosing, the historicist analysis of which is the basis of an independent research project. As part of this project, students were asked to prepare a blog post that reflected on aspects of Shakespeare’s life, a specific work, or a resource or organization associated with Shakespeare, or to provide a personal interpretation of a play. During the month of April, we’ll feature the posts from students that celebrate all things Shakespeare!

Congratulations to our wonderful first-year writers. For additional online resources about Shakespeare, check out these sites:

• British Library: http://www.bl.uk/
• Folger Shakespeare Library: http://www.folger.edu/
• Globe Theatre: http://www.shakespearesglobe.com
• Internet Shakespeare Editions: http://internetshakespeare.uvic.ca
• Shakespeare 400:  http://www.shakespeare400.org/

Girl Bosses through the Lens of Shakespeare
By Kendall Aresu

The Roles of a Wife to her Husband

I don’t know about you, but I would hate to be a woman in the 16^th century. All these expectations of what it means to be a woman is enough to fire up the feminist in anyone. One can only imagine the upheaval that was caused by a single female taking the throne. Thankfully, Elizabeth I of England was influential in a multitude of ways. From shedding light on the arts to bringing a new view of what it means to be a monarch, Elizabeth was present in almost all of the accounts of England during this time. William Shakespeare, not unlike many writers at this time, seeped the societal concerns of Elizabeth into his plays.

By creating many different female roles but never making them royalty shows Shakespeare’s and also the Elizabethan people’s view of what it meant to be a woman. The female characters in Shakespeare’s play are mostly used as a symbol of sympathy for the audience. The one character that defies this weak feminine image is Lady Macbeth. She is construed as ambitious which is a very strange quality for a woman to have at this time. However, it is refreshing to see a powerful woman in one of Shakespeare’s plays. Lady Macbeth uses her husband to fulfill her own political agenda which is unnatural and shows an inversion of gender roles (J. Dall). Shakespeare shows the negative view of female power by portraying Lady Macbeth as power-hungry and obsessed with gaining political standing. As the play goes on it is clear that Lady Macbeth’s strength is faltering. This is crucial to how the people of this time were viewing Elizabeth. This play mirrors what the people felt once Lady Macbeth died which was a sense of relief so they could have a male ruler and return to the status quo.

Elizabeth faced many challenges being a female ruler and no matter what she would accomplish as a queen she would still be considered inadequate when compared to a male. The idea of a female ruler associated a vision of vulnerability with Elizabeth. By calling herself the Virgin Queen, she was able to connect her legacy with female honor as well as chastity. Similar to how Lady Macbeth’s strength deteriorates as the play goes on, Elizabeth’s health was deteriorating as she aged leaving the people with a relief that they would once again have a male ruler. One could argue that since Elizabeth was Protestant she was adequate in the people’s eyes (“Elizabeth I”). Religion was a big deal when it comes to the monarchy, the people would be more willing to accept Elizabeth because she was Protestant.

Shakespeare uses the symbol of Lady Macbeth to reflect the dangers of having a female in a position of political power. He shows that women are irrational and that having a woman as a ruler is unnatural. Shakespeare reflects the views of the Elizabethan people at this time which shows how they thought of the image of a woman should be. Thankfully nowadays we are in a society that does not have such tight social and gender constraints.

Bibliography

Trevillian, Thomas. Trevelyon Mischellany of 1608. Digital image. Folger Shakespeare Library. N.p., n.d. Web. 1 Mar. 2016

Dall, Jane. “The Stage and the State: Shakespeare’s Portrayal of Women and Sovereign Issues in Macbeth and Hamlet.” The Stage and the State: Shakespeare’s Portrayal of Women and Sovereign Issues in Macbeth and Hamlet. Hanover Historical Review 8, Spring 2000. Web. 01 Mar. 2016

“Elizabeth I.” The Official Website of The British Monarchy. N.p., n.d. Web. 01 Mar. 2016

In honor of William Shakespeare we are celebrating the 400th anniversary of his death on April 23, 2016. What better way to do this, than by highlighting the writing done by first-year students in Associate Professor of English John Wesley’s first-year seminar, A Year in the Life of William Shakespeare? This first-year seminar in scholarly inquiry studies four remarkable plays Shakespeare wrote or saw into production in 1599, the same year he opened the Globe Theatre. In the first half of the course, students were introduced to the myriad ways in which Shakespeare’s 1599 plays are shaped by and give shape to the political and cultural intrigues of that year. In the second half of the course, students turned to a play (and year) of their own choosing, the historicist analysis of which is the basis of an independent research project. As part of this project, students were asked to prepare a blog post that reflected on aspects of Shakespeare’s life, a specific work, or a resource or organization associated with Shakespeare, or to provide a personal interpretation of a play. During the month of April, we’ll feature the posts from students that celebrate all things Shakespeare!

Congratulations to our wonderful first-year writers. For additional online resources about Shakespeare, check out these sites:

• British Library: http://www.bl.uk/
• Folger Shakespeare Library: http://www.folger.edu/
• Globe Theatre: http://www.shakespearesglobe.com
• Internet Shakespeare Editions: http://internetshakespeare.uvic.ca
• Shakespeare 400:  http://www.shakespeare400.org/

Shakespeare in Football
By Wren Norwood

When people think of the mark that William Shakespeare left on culture they think of his witty banter and probably the iambic pentameter or something like that. Little is it known that Tottenham Hotspur’s, one of England’s most successful football (which is called soccer here in the US) teams, namesake is based from a character in Henry IV, Part One. Many of Shakespeare’s plays were able to garner popularity both during his life time and after his death due to how he was able to incorporate relevant themes of love, war, and tragedy into them. Along with interesting themes Shakespeare infused flamboyant characters that audiences of his plays fell in love with. These characters that Shakespeare created were exciting and full of life.

One of Shakespeare’s most beloved characters was from his most popular play of his lifetime. Although Falstaff of Henry IV, Part One is probably the most well liked character from the play, the rebels who seem to be the natural antagonists of the play, exemplify several traits both citizens of the past and present can identify with such as passion and bravery. One character in particular that comes to mind is the fiery Henry Hotspur depicted by Shakespeare as a feisty young man with a temperament toward waging war and doing battle. Shakespeare’s creation of Hotspur was so popular throughout the culture of England and Europe his nickname has forever been immortalized by the Football Club Tottenham Hotspur.

Tottenham Hotspur, often called just Spurs for short, is a highly successful and storied football club in England’s Premier Football League. Being the first English club to win the prestigious European Cup, now called the Champions League, the club holds quite a bit of swagger around England. The club posses the nick name of Henry Hotspur for several reasons. A widely accepted reason for the club naming itself after the famous rebel is because in 1882, when the club was formed by school boys from a grammar school under street lamp light, those particular boys were already part of Hotspur Cricket Club. Another reason is that one of the first playing grounds used by the club were owned by descendants of Henry Hotspur.

The club was not alone in the usage of the namesake of Henry Hotspur. In fact, the club did not officially name itself Tottenham Hotspur Football Club until after a club named London Hotspur raised complaints because of the similarity of the names. The boys under that street light wanted to create a club that echoed the characteristics of the character created by Shakespeare, they wanted their club to go to games and play football in the way that Henry Hotspur would have gone to war and done battle. The club’s current crest even matches the style of Henry Hotspur’s fighting spirit, by it being a depiction of one of his famous fighting cocks fitted with spurs standing on a ball. Although Shakespeare’s character was actually a traitor to his king, the man the people saw placed by Shakespeare on stage has been immortalized as a knight of bravery, honor, and flamboyance.

Shakespeare’s effect on the culture of the world can be witnessed seemingly without bounds. Sports, usually seen as a pastime to for people to separate themselves from work or real life has been linked with Shakespeare’s most daring yet serious character of Henry IV, Part One. Though there is no doubt the Tottenham Hotspur Football Club has represented the fighting spirit of Shakespeare’s character; Henry IV part one’s Henry Hotspur ironically would have never enjoyed taking the time off from grave actions like making war and doing battle to play games like football.

Bibliography

Collie, Ashley Jude. “Shakespeare’s Hotspur Would Be Proud to See His Namesake Tottenham Hotspur Leading Another British Invasion of America.” The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com. Web. 02 Mar. 2016.

Hand, Richard J. “Shakespeare, Soccer, And Spin-Doctors: Staging A Contemporary “Henry V”; “Henry V” At Chapter Arts Centre, Cardiff, Wales, UK, November 2002.” College Literature 31.4 (2004): 60-71. Professional Development Collection. Web. 2 Mar. 2016.

In honor of William Shakespeare we are celebrating the 400th anniversary of his death on April 23, 2016. What better way to do this, than by highlighting the writing done by first-year students in Associate Professor of English John Wesley’s first-year seminar, A Year in the Life of William Shakespeare? This first-year seminar in scholarly inquiry studies four remarkable plays Shakespeare wrote or saw into production in 1599, the same year he opened the Globe Theatre. In the first half of the course, students were introduced to the myriad ways in which Shakespeare’s 1599 plays are shaped by and give shape to the political and cultural intrigues of that year. In the second half of the course, students turned to a play (and year) of their own choosing, the historicist analysis of which is the basis of an independent research project. As part of this project, students were asked to prepare a blog post that reflected on aspects of Shakespeare’s life, a specific work, or a resource or organization associated with Shakespeare, or to provide a personal interpretation of a play. During the month of April, we’ll feature the posts from students that celebrate all things Shakespeare!

Congratulations to our wonderful first-year writers. For additional online resources about Shakespeare, check out these sites:

• British Library: http://www.bl.uk/
• Folger Shakespeare Library: http://www.folger.edu/
• Globe Theatre: http://www.shakespearesglobe.com
• Internet Shakespeare Editions: http://internetshakespeare.uvic.ca
• Shakespeare 400:  http://www.shakespeare400.org/

Shakespearean Fashion
By Anna Mullins

Portrait: http://www.elizabethanenglandlife.com/

Fashion has always played an important part in our lives, but we tend to take it for granted. Today, we usually just throw something quick and comfortable on. People during Shakespeare’s time were not always free to wear whatever they felt like and there were very strict societal rules and even laws governing what you were allowed to wear and when you could wear it.

“The reign of Queen Elizabeth marks an era of unprecedented activity in the history of restraints on apparel” (Hooper). Queen Elizabeth was very fond of outward uniformity and etiquette and this showed in her attempt to regulate a quickly growing and changing populace. She even went as far as assigning two “watchers”, men who were spies for Queen Elizabeth, for every parish to make sure that all citizens obeyed the new law. Even in the presence of constant and overbearing regulations fashion still managed to thrive and change as quickly as it does today. It’s hard to imagine that a woman so strict in her views on what others could wear would have such a passion for fashion but Elizabeth had a large amount of clothing. It has been noted that, “Elizabeth I spent large amounts on clothes and jewelry both for herself and as marks of favor,” and had “six thousand dresses and it was found that art could not devise anything more costly and gorgeous” (Jones and Stallybrass). From the information we have, we can tell that fashion and garments were a significant part of the lives of the citizens of Elizabethan England.

One question you might have is: “But what does all this have to do with Shakespeare and his plays?” Well, it has everything to do with Shakespearean theater. Clothing was vital for the stage because all of the players were biologically male. This is very different from the way things are today but was the norm for many, many centuries as it was seen as indecent for a woman to be an actor. The first thing the audience would see, that would define a character would be the clothing worn by the actor. During this time period, women’s clothing significantly established the shape of the wearer due to the rigid form of the bodice. Women of this time wore many layers with very little skin showing, so for a male actor and one who was most likely prepubescent it would not have been difficult to pass as a woman on the stage because the only part of his body showing would have been his face. Clothing did more on the stage than tell the audience the sex of the character, it also materially constructed the masculinity or femininity of the intended gender because the dress during this time was so rigidly gendered. There was no ambivalence as to whether or not a specific article was male or female like there is today. The clothing also established the actions that the person could not or should not pursue. For example, when Olivia wore men’s trousers in “The Twelfth Night”.

In our fast paced and hectic lives many of us don’t get to take the time to dress how we would like and don’t get the opportunity to express ourselves through fashion any more. It wasn’t always this way and it doesn’t have to remain this way. Let’s bring back the importance fashion once held and wear our clothing with pride.

Bibliography

Hooper, Wilfrid. “The Tudor Sumptuary Laws.” The English Historical Review (1915): 433-449.

Jones, Ann Rosalind and Peter Stallybrass. Renaissance Clothing and the Materials of Memory. Cambridge: University of Cambridge, 2000.

Portrait: http://www.elizabethanenglandlife.com/

In honor of William Shakespeare we are celebrating the 400th anniversary of his death on April 23, 2016. What better way to do this, than by highlighting the writing done by first-year students in Associate Professor of English John Wesley’s first-year seminar, A Year in the Life of William Shakespeare? This first-year seminar in scholarly inquiry studies four remarkable plays Shakespeare wrote or saw into production in 1599, the same year he opened the Globe Theatre. In the first half of the course, students were introduced to the myriad ways in which Shakespeare’s 1599 plays are shaped by and give shape to the political and cultural intrigues of that year. In the second half of the course, students turned to a play (and year) of their own choosing, the historicist analysis of which is the basis of an independent research project. As part of this project, students were asked to prepare a blog post that reflected on aspects of Shakespeare’s life, a specific work, or a resource or organization associated with Shakespeare, or to provide a personal interpretation of a play. During the month of April, we’ll feature the posts from students that celebrate all things Shakespeare!

Congratulations to our wonderful first-year writers. For additional online resources about Shakespeare, check out these sites:

• British Library: http://www.bl.uk/
• Folger Shakespeare Library: http://www.folger.edu/
• Globe Theatre: http://www.shakespearesglobe.com
• Internet Shakespeare Editions: http://internetshakespeare.uvic.ca
• Shakespeare 400:  http://www.shakespeare400.org/

The Audience of Shakespeare’s Globe
By Sarah Rau

Interior of the Swan Theatre by Johannes de Witt drawn in 1596

While plays have evolved into a luxurious form of entertainment, they were once a common leisure. The plays of William Shakespeare are a notable example of this evolution. Today, attending a Shakespeare play is considered a significant occasion; however, when his plays were first being produced, playgoing was simple entertainment for all people. Shakespeare’s three-storied Globe, located in London, was an exceptional example of a diverse audience. Holding around three-thousand people at its maximum occupancy, the Globe theatre accommodated a group of people, ranging from criminals to nobility.

The cheapest admission at Shakespeare’s Globe was into the Penny Gallery or yard. The Penny Gallery referred to an extremely-crowded standing area surrounding the stage; entry into this area only cost one cent. Situated in the center of the open-air theatre, this area of the Globe was exposed to the unpredictable London weather. The audience members in the Penny Gallery endured the somewhat lengthy plays without seating, but they did enjoy food and drink. On the downside, the Penny Gallery was thus cursed by a reek of what some described as garlic and beer according to the Shakespeare’s Globe company. One could only imagine what the unwashed playgoers and lack of lavatories added to the already potent smell of food and alcohol. Although uncomfortably cramped and surrounded by unpleasant odors in the Penny Gallery, one had the advantage of intimacy with the players. Being within reach of the stage, the commoners were able to interact with the play and be swept up into its tale. The other audience members did not enjoy this personal experience although they were free of most inconveniences associated with the Penny Gallery.

Above the Penny Gallery stood different tiers of audience members. These tiers mimicked the social hierarchy of the time – the lower galleries held the commoners while the higher galleries were reserved for higher-class citizens. One could scan the audience from the Penny Gallery up to the third-floor, carefully observing the broad scope of the audience. According to Andrew Gurr, a broad variety of people, from prostitutes and pickpockets to army captains, occupied the lower galleries. In the lower galleries, one could afford the luxury of a bench seat for the cost of two pennies.

Above the lower galleries, wealthier people, such as merchants and lawyers who could afford pricier seating, populated the Central Galleries. The highest galleries, containing the most expensive seating, were known as the Lord’s Rooms. In the higher galleries, one could enjoy sheltered seating and the prominence of being among wealthier citizens rather than commoners and their crude stenches. Understandably, the aristocracy used their wealth as an advantage to segregate themselves from the overpopulated, unpleasant Penny Gallery, yet the intimacy became absent from their experience because of their distance from the stage.

Each social class possessed its own comforts at the Globe; the wealthy welcomed the luxury of prestige and covered seating while the lower classes enjoyed their ability to buy food and drink as well as interact with the play. In contrast with today’s world and regardless of the distinct division among social rank at the time, playgoing at Shakespeare’s Globe remained a form of entertainment enjoyed by the majority of Londoners.

Interior of the Swan Theatre by Johannes de Witt drawn in 1596. The Globe closely resembled the Swan Theatre – this drawing is the closest artifact to an original drawing of the Globe.

Bibliography

“Audiences.” Shakespeare’s Globe: Globe Education. The Shakespeare Globe Trust, 2013. Web. 26 Feb. 2016.

De Witt, Johannes. The Swan. 1596. The Shakespearean Stage 1574-1642. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2009. 163. Print.

Gurr, Andrew. The Shakespearean Stage 1574-1642. New York: Cambridge UP, 2009. Print.

Harbage, Alfred. Shakespeare’s Audience. New York: Columbia UP, 1941. Print.

In honor of William Shakespeare we are celebrating the 400th anniversary of his death on April 23, 2016. What better way to do this, than by highlighting the writing done by first-year students in Associate Professor of English John Wesley’s first-year seminar, A Year in the Life of William Shakespeare? This first-year seminar in scholarly inquiry studies four remarkable plays Shakespeare wrote or saw into production in 1599, the same year he opened the Globe Theatre. In the first half of the course, students were introduced to the myriad ways in which Shakespeare’s 1599 plays are shaped by and give shape to the political and cultural intrigues of that year. In the second half of the course, students turned to a play (and year) of their own choosing, the historicist analysis of which is the basis of an independent research project. As part of this project, students were asked to prepare a blog post that reflected on aspects of Shakespeare’s life, a specific work, or a resource or organization associated with Shakespeare, or to provide a personal interpretation of a play. During the month of April, we’ll feature the posts from students that celebrate all things Shakespeare!

Congratulations to our wonderful first-year writers. For additional online resources about Shakespeare, check out these sites:

• British Library: http://www.bl.uk/
• Folger Shakespeare Library: http://www.folger.edu/
• Globe Theatre: http://www.shakespearesglobe.com
• Internet Shakespeare Editions: http://internetshakespeare.uvic.ca
• Shakespeare 400:  http://www.shakespeare400.org/

The Spark of Creativity
By Megan Biglow

It’s often thought that no idea is entirely original. Whether you are creating a derivative of another person’s ideas or basing your work off of an admirable example, we are all influenced and inspired to some degree by the work that others do. William Shakespeare was no exception to this phenomenon. Although there is not an overwhelming amount of proof of this, it seems as though Shakespeare was heavily influenced and inspired by Roman and Greek literature and history. This is shown subtly in a vast majority of his work and more transparently in his re-writing of history in plays like Julius Caesar. I assumed that this inspiration was shown in plays involving fantastical and dramatic tales that are set in otherworldly places like The Tempest and A Midsummer Night’s Dream. And how could you not be inspired? From epic tales of heroes fighting off monstrous, deadly creatures, to all-powerful gods, it is nearly impossible to not be struck by the intense imagery and grandiose nature of the tales and epics that originated in Greece. So I was particularly surprised to find that Plutarch’s writings regarding romance and politics inspired Shakespeare heavily. As Plutarch was a Greek man who later became a citizen of Rome, it only makes sense that the political and social savagery that occurred on a regular basis within Rome would have influenced Plutarch’s, and indirectly Shakespeare’s, writings heavily.

It only makes sense that William Shakespeare would have been so heavily affected by Plutarch’s essays, as they were extremely popular during his time. One author states, “The sixteenth century was indeed steeped in Plutarch. His writings formed an almost inexhaustible storehouse for historian and philosopher alike, and the age was characterized by no diffidence or moderation in borrowing. Plutarch’s aphorisms and his anecdotes meet us at every turn, openly or in disguise” (Brooke “Plutarch’s Influence”) the same of which could be said of Shakespeare in this day and age. As a vast majority of people, including myself, can attest, Shakespeare’s work is studied extensively and is immersed in our culture through language, movies and art of all kinds. The very words he wrote permeate our speech and writing today, just as Plutarch would have for the people of the 16^th century. That being said, it would only make sense that Shakespeare would be heavily affected, or at the very least, interested in the work of a man that was so prevalent and influential in his time.

The fact that an excellent author was inspired by a brilliant mind, aside from his own, is a prime example of the necessity for education and appreciation of exceptional literature. Had William Shakespeare not become so well versed in Plutarch’s essays, it is entirely possible that he would not have been as prestigious and exemplary as he was in his time and in present day. And personally, I would think that life would be boring without writers that can give us an entertaining and fascinating escape from our daily lives from time to time. It is deeply important to understand the plays, essays and writers from the past so that we too can be inspired to create excellent, immersive and cerebral.

Bibliography

Walbank, Frank W. X66541-004-582E8B66.jpg.pagespeed.ic.zSskYXxY3u. Digital image. Encyclopedia Britannica. The Editors of Encyclopædia Britannica, n.d. Web. 11 Nov. 2015.

Plutarch. Plutarch’s Shakespeare. Ed. C.F. Tucker Brooke. London: Chatto and Windus, 1909. Shakespeare Online. 20 Feb. 2010. (2/27/16) <http://www.shakespeare-online.com/essays/plutarchshakespeare.html >.

Wyndham, George. North’s Plutarch. From Essays in romantic literature. London: Macmillan and Company, 1919. Shakespeare Online. 20 Feb. 2010. (2/25/16) <http://www.shakespeare-online.com/essays/northshakespeare.html >.