Pam October 27th, 2008
Here are some fun facts about Shakespeare I’ve learned in recent research:
- Other than his christening in 1564, there is no recorded information about Shakespeare until his marriage.
- He married a 26-year-old woman named Anne Hathaway when he was 18, in 1562.
- They had a daughter, Susanna, and twins, Judith and Hamnet.
- Shakespeare left Stratford-upon-Avon, where he was born and married and presumably educated, around 1590, when he first turned up in London.
- One of the first times he is mentioned in London, he’s referred to as an “upstart crow.”
- No one really knows which of his plays he wrote first, although most scholars believe early plays were The Comedy of Errors, The Taming of the Shrew, Richard III, Two Gentlemen of Verona, and Love’s Labour’s Lost.
- Shakespeare was a player (actor) as well as a writer. He kept up a furious pace, writing new works for his company, The Chamberlain’s Men, and performing too.
- He made hardly any money from his plays; they were owned by the acting companies. He was a shareholder in his company.
- It is assumed that he visited his family in Stratford, but nobody knows how often. Later in life he bought a large home there known as New Place.
- Shakespeare’s son Hamnet died at age 11, cause unknown.
- Shakespeare moved back to Stratford when he retired from playwriting and acting, sometime between 1612-1616.
- Shakespeare died in 1616 and is buried at Holy Trinity Church in Stratford.
There are thousands of books and articles written about Shakespeare and his plays and poems. It must be frustrating for Shakespeare scholars that so little is known for certain about his life. What was the connection between the man William Shakespeare and his enduring works? A question for the ages!
What facts about Shakespeare fascinate you?
Tags: Shakespeare Trivia
Pam October 18th, 2008
Recently on Weekend Edition, Scott Simon interviewed a professor from Oberlin, Anne Trubek, about an article she’d written for Good magazine. She believes The Catcher in the Rye should be retired as part of the English/Language Arts curriculum in high schools. Today’s students no longer identify with Holden Caulfield, a white, upper class, prep school student, she contends. Simon pushed her pretty hard, saying, “But it’s a CLASSIC!” Trubek reminded him that TCITR was itself an “instant classic,” deemed so just a few years after its publication.
We all remember having various “classics” shoved down our throats in high school, when we were too immature and inexperienced to appreciate them. A friend still hates The Good Earth because she had to read it in 10th grade. I’m reading it right now for my book club, and I can understand why a 15-year-old wouldn’t connect with it. My sister’s son was required to read Pride and Prejudice his senior year, and of course he hated it. Really, expecting a teenage boy to find anything to relate to in Jane Austen is a stretch, even for me, an Austen fanatic.
Prof. Trubek suggests several books which may resonate more with teens than some of the old stand-bys. Contemporary YA novels get my vote–I never have understood why they’re not used in the schools. A few from recent years that would inspire great discussions: Luna, The Astonishing Life of Octavian Nothing, The Book Thief, Elsewhere, Life As We Knew It, Slam, Samurai Shortstop, and there are plenty of crossovers, too, such as The Kite Runner.
Tags: Catcher in the Rye, Classics, YA Novels
Pam October 7th, 2008
I’ve never watched Gossip Girl before, but I’m watching it tonight. Right now. Since I’m writing for tweens and YA’s, I thought I should check out the show whose characters seem to be all over the internet. What’s all the fuss about?
Despite the show’s pretty glaring flaws–everyone’s rich, there’s not a person of color in sight, and it has that annoying voice-over reminiscent of Sex and the City–I got into it (okay, I’m slightly embarrassed to admit it). I like Blake Lively, who I know from The Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants movies. The others I’ve never seen or heard of before. The guy who plays Chuck totally reminds me of a vampire, but since all things vampire are popular right now…I can see how this might be appealing.
A few months ago, a well-known critic from the New Yorker, Janet Malcolm, reviewed the Gossip Girl series (the books). I thought she’d hate them, but she made the point that the writer, Cecily Von Zisegar, is poking fun at her main characters while simultaneously sympathizing with them. She’s not a fan of the show, however, and I quote, “Without Von Ziegesar’s fast, mocking, commentary to propel them, the TV episodes are sluggish and crass–a move from Barnney’s to Kmart.” Read Malcolm’s review.
What do you think? Enlighten me. Please.
Tags: Cecily Von Ziegesar, Gossip Girl, Janet Malcolm
