Personal Evaluation!

In preparation for interviews, here is my evaluation!

Learning Outcomes:

 

I feel like I've done a pretty good job of staying up to date with posting and commenting! I've posted regularly what I feel to be two substantial posts every week, and have been commenting on other blogs and posts as well. I've been getting involved with social learning by watching the Bollywood version of Othello with Brooke, involving my roommates and boyfriend with my various reading assignments, and I also attended the conference call with Fred Adams.  

1. Shakespeare Literacy

1a) Thus far, I have read Hamlet, Richard III, Romeo and Juliet, Twelfth Night, and The Tempest.

1b) With my reading of The Tempest, I researched the more detailed character analysis list so that I could be more familiar with not just the characters, but their defining characteristics and moments within the text.

1c) I have watched the Bollywood Othello, as well as the Mel Gibson Hamlet, and She's the Man, the modern take on Twelfth Night. I've also engaged a few Youtube videos, which include short clips and humorous spoofs.

1d) I've researched into the historical practices of the times. I've posted on Renaissance music, marriage customs, etc. that have attempted to go deeper into the text by understanding the common practices of the time. The focus of my blog is Shakespeare in popular culture such as music, movies, books, etc.

 

2. Analyze critically

2a) This is an area that I'm planning on focusing on more. Honestly, I would really appreciate suggestions on how to do this better. This learning outcome, in addition to outcome 2d is where I'm lacking the most.

 

2b) Again, I've looked a lot at the historical setting for the plays, as well as the influences these plays have had on modern media as well as our perception of historical events and persons (like Richard III).

 

2c) This is where I'm lacking the most. Actually, getting to look at Janelle's blog helped me a lot. I think it's a really good idea to engage literary lenses to analyze the different plays, and that's something I want to try to do myself. I would like other suggestions for how to do this better.

 

2d) I fulfilled this requirement by looking at a few different renditions of Shakespeare's work. The Bollywood version of Othello titled Omkara was an interesting look at hot other cultures perceive and present Shakespeare. I also looked at how the movie She's the Man took Shakespeare's play Twelfth Night and used it as a frame for the story they told in the movie, as well as how they changed the plot in some major ways.

3. Engage Shakespeare Creatively

3a) I'm involved in Brooke's planning for a edited video of a scene from Twelfth Night. I also plan on writing a song based on the emotions and thoughts of one of the characters of Shakespeare's plays.

3b) I'm not entirely sure that I understand this correctly, but I am planning on taking a scene from one of Shakespeare's plays and trying to do a modern translation. I want to still retain the main feeling and meaning in the text, but make it more understandable to a modern audience.

4. Share Meaningfully

 

This blog has been my main means of sharing Shakespeare meaningfully. It's been a really neat way to spread what I've researched and learned, as well as learn from others. I have been able to take what I've learned and not only utilize it in class, but I've also been able to share it with my roommates, family, and friends outside of class. It's really neat to be able to say "Hey, did you know that this is based on a Shakespeare play?" or "During this time, this is what the people thought about this, and this is how they did that!" It gives me credibility and helps me sound intelligent when I'm discussing not just Shakespeare, but the numerous other  works and artistic expressions that have come from it.

Reading and Research:

I outlined above which plays I've read. In addition to those plays, I've been reading a book about the practices and conventions of Shakespeare's time which has been very helpful to my understanding of certain things in the plays. I have read the introductions to each play that are in our Shakespeare book which has been very helpful by giving a brief history and background information for me before delving in. I've also read numerous online articles that have been very informative and interesting. Some of these articles have come from my own searching, while some have come from the research and searching of my fellow classmates on their blogs!

Peer Influence:

Ive really enjoyed Cara's posts, as well as her efforts to get the class involved. Her courage in setting up the interview with Mr. Adams was really beneficial for me, as well as I'm sure the rest of the class who read about the interview on our blogs. I also really have enjoyed Martin's blog. His posts have been interesting and informative, and his blog has been a really good example for how to layout a blog effectively. That has been very helpful since I've never done a blog before.

Personal Impact:

This class has forced me to try something new by creating my own blog. I'd never tried this before, and the closest I'd ever come to blogging (if you can even consider this remotely similar) is Facebook with my occasional posts. This has been a really fun experience, and has taught me that I can connect with other people to share my ideas and thoughts, and to learn from their ideas and thoughts as well. Blogging has enabled me to write about my progress, ask questions, and share the interesting things that I have come to learn. 

Another way this has impacted me, is by showing my that if I want to learn more about something, there are so many resources at my disposal! Books, articles, websites, as well as peers are all there! If I really want to know more about something, all I need to do is start looking. Even professionals are willing to talk and answer questions if I take the time to stop and ask them about their work and field of interest.

 

I've also come to notice that I tend to be really interested in how certain works and people have influenced thoughts and ideas and popular culture today. I love to see how things have changed and progressed, how ideas have been taken and expanded upon, and how things that are really quality and timeless works really do last. 

This class has shown me that learning is really a lot of fun! It takes time, but if it's something I'm interested in, and I'm able to work with other people around me who are interested to, it makes it so much less tedious and so much more real and interesting.

Personal Evaluation:

I think I've done a good job so far with this class. My blogging has been regular, I've been able to encompass most of the learning outcomes (to my knowledge), and I've engaged with my peers in the class to learn. Where I'm lacking the most right now is in my textual analysis and application of literary theories in my research of Shakespeare, but I will strive to make that more of a focus for my blogging efforts during the next half of the semester.

Peer Blog Review: Janelle McCune

Hey Janelle! So, I am just going to direct this post to you so you can look through and see my reviews/suggestions about your blog!

*Number of Posts:  

You've posted 13 posts to date. 

*Quality of Posts: 

You have had a few really good, substantial posts. For example, your historical analysis of King Henry IV was really good. It fulfilled a few learning outcomes, and was well organized and written out on your blog. Also, your formalistic view of Hamlet was really interesting and well done as well. It engages literary criticism of the text, which is something I'm trying to figure out how to do better myself. Your self-directed learning plan is also really organized and well planned. Overall though, your less substantial posts are more prevalent than your substantial posts. I commend your effort to follow Professor Burton's advice to continue blogging even if it can't be substantial! I would say that working on getting your posts more substantial would be a good goal for you.

*A Strength:

I think my favorite post of yours was the historical outline of King Henry IV. I think this post was really good for a few reasons! First, I liked how you gave a brief history of the major events. I also liked how you included a comparison of the actual Royal Genealogy of England as compared to Shakespeare's Royal Genealogy of England. The timeline that you included was also really informative and interesting. All in all, this post was really well done. 

*Suggested Improvement:

As I mentioned, I think focusing on making your posts more substantial would be a good goal for you. You've had good ideas with regards to how to do that. I like how you are trying to use literary lenses like formalism and mythology to study different plays, and are stepping out on a limb by proposing ideas like a puppet show, but I think you need to just make sure you go for it and get them going! You have a good start though!

Prospero - A character analysis and comparison

 

So, ladies and gentlemen, I first and foremost must apologize for my atrocious lack of posting up until this point in time. I was privileged enough to return home and celebrate my birthday this President's Day weekend in California with my family! So, while I had all of my research and blogs written out, I must confess I didn't feel the urge to log on and post them up until now!

So, on to Shakespearean topics! First, The Tempest was really enjoyable to read. I liked the elements of magic, and I won't lie to you, I like happily ever after, romantic endings.

I was reading the Sparknotes major character analysis about The Tempest, and the thing that stuck out to me the most was the idea that Prospero is a surrogate for Shakespeare in the play. According to Wikipedia, "Many feel that since The Tempest was Shakespeare's last play (though he did write one more, with some assistance), Prospero's feelings echo Shakespeare's own."

Epilogue

Now my charms are all o'erthrown,
And what strength I have's mine own,
Which is most faint: now, 'tis true,
I must be here confined by you,
Or sent to Naples. Let me not,
Since I have my dukedom got
And pardon'd the deceiver, dwell
In this bare island by your spell;
But release me from my bands
With the help of your good hands:
Gentle breath of yours my sails
Must fill, or else my project fails,
Which was to please. Now I want
Spirits to enforce, art to enchant,
And my ending is despair,
Unless I be relieved by prayer,
Which pierces so that it assaults
Mercy itself and frees all faults.
As you from crimes would pardon'd be,
Let your indulgence set me free .

 The Sparknotes character review also noted that by having Prospero control the happenings of events on the island, and be responsible for carrying forward the plot, Shakespeare was "enabling the audience to explore firsthand the ambiguities and ultimate wonder of the creative endeavor."

When looking at Prospero's character in this light, it is really interesting to me to notice how Shakespeare involves his audience in this work. He gives us a glimpse into what it is like to create a world and story. He also shows us how dependent his works and successes are upon the audience and their reception. When Prospero gives his final speech, his ability to depart from the island and regain his dukedom rests in the hands of the audience. They had all the power to bequeath or deny Prospero his freedom and success, just as they had the ability to decide the ultimate acceptance or flop of Shakespeare's plays.

An Interview with Fred Adams - head of the Utah Shakespeare Festival

 

 So, last Friday I went to the phone interview that Cara set up with Fred Adams. First, I have to say that this man knows his Shakespeare! It was a really neat experience talking to someone who uses so much of his time and effort to study Shakespeare and put on productions of his plays. Secondly, the only people who showed up to this phone interview were Cara, Brian, and myself. The rest of you guys missed out! I don't mean to gloat, but it was a really neat opportunity. Below are a few main points that I got from the interview. For a complete account of the interview, visit Cara's page!

1. During Shakespeare's time there was a lot of activity taking place around Globe theater! The theater was by Bear pits. There were dog and bear fights going on, as well Moorish dancers surrounding theater and dancing, attracting attention with bells and dancing, and there were vendors singing out their wares. recreated that feeling with the green show. In the Shakespeare festival, they recreate this atmosphere. It helps prepare an audience for a language used in Shakespeare's plays. When you first hear the language, you think won't be able to understand. By having performers already using that dialect and language, those attending the festival are already in the mood and the Shakespearean language is not as strange and foreign to them when the production begins.

2. The overriding reason that Shakespeare is so widely acclaimed and loved is universality. He understood the human condition. He recreated this in his plays so perfectly that a 14 year old girl in America or Nairobi would have the same thoughts and feelings today as Juliet did in Verona. Also, we recognize elements of self in the characters; elements within all of the characters we discover in ourselves, or if not in ourselves in those we know. The other reason for success was Shakespeare's magnificent use of language. He uses poetry and rich imagery to describe for example the sunrise description by Romeo (Romeo and Juliet). Shakespeare had the ability to capture humanity in its real state and also clothe with its poetic description.

3. We don't know a lot about private life of Shakespeare. It was dangerous to keep a journal or write about oneself. If the law changed, and it was written down on paper that you'd acted in a certain way it could mean a beheading. For example, Samuel Keats diary was the first diary kept. He was so frightened that it might be read that he wrote in special code - upside down mirror image. It took 3 centuries to decipher the code.Shakespeare could've played tennis, but doubt if he did. He uses tennis in several of his plays, but there is no record of whether he actually played. One of his favorite past-times was drinking. There is quite a bit of reference to his having loved to spend time in taverns and alehouses. That's where he heard his language and got his ideas for characters. All of these men in his plays came out of actual people in the taverns of London. Shakespeare would sit in the corner with an ale and observe and record language. That gave his works an actual sense of believability. Another reason don't know a lot about Shakeapeare is that more and more literary detectives are discovering that Shakespeare was probably a closet catholic. It was against the law to be catholic, and he could be punished for practicing. To the public, he let it be known he was a protestant, but found in his home hidden in rafters was a hidden catholic prayer book. Shakespeare's father was truly a catholic, and that's how he lost his position as Lord Mayor of Stratford. He was not keeping responsibility of city father to destroy catholic stained glass and alters; he was always "sick" when they went to do so. It was not not long before village realized he was catholic.

4. In Shakespeare's plays there are many strong women characters (Portia, Rosalind, etc). Most of them dressed as men to solve problems. In his plays, often women were in control, as in Merry Wives of Windsor. They were powerful and strong. These characters were produced when he was writing plays for Queen Elizabeth. She loved the strong women characters. The minute King James came into power, Shakespeare's plays changed. King James didn't like women in power. From that point on, Shakespeare has his women characters in his work change completely. They get smothered, drowned, raped, etc. Shakespeare was a political animal. He was writing his plays to sell at the theater that night, and they HAD to sell. Overall, in England women were treated more equally than many women of the time. Because of Queen Elizabeth, women were more honored in England's history than say in the history of Spain. Even so, English women could not inherit. When shakespeare dies he can only leave his wife his second best bed.

5. Shakespeare retired from London and returned to Stratford to live out the rest of his life with his family. According to legend,  he died choking on a vat of ale over a bawdy joke. We don't know whether it's true or not. We do know that he retired extremely wealthy and lionized throughout all of England. Shakespeare was a major household name. Even after retirement, his home in Stratford become somewhat of a mecca, even while he was still alive.

6. There is a "Shakespeare Consipracy" theory. People speculate "Who wrote Shakepeare's works?" Was it the Earl of Oxford? Bacon? Marlow? Elizabeth the first? All these theories have credible reasonings but no one has any proof. Remember, all we know is that the boy known as William Shakespeare, was considered during his entire lifetime by his competitors as well as contemporaries to be author of plays of Shakespeare. It was not till 200 years after in 1830 that anyone decided that he could not have written because the vocabulary in the plays is so huge, and Shakespeare was not a university graduate. That's slightly ridiculous according to Mr. Adams. It's like saying that Mozart couldn't have written music since he wasn't trained. There is such a thing as genius. Shakespeare didn't write all of the parts of the plays, there are elements of other writings incorporated in. Possibly by actors who rewrote a part to fit to self or make more powerful? The bulk are attributed to the lad William Shakespeare from Stratford.

7. There is a theory that Greenbaum and group of detectives discovered that there seems to be a lot of proof for, and which could be developing into a known fact soon. Shakespeare disappeared from Stratford after wife gave birth. They were living with parents, when all of a sudden he vanishes, and we don't hear about him until he shows up in London several years later. It was discovered that his schoolteachers in Stratford were catholic, and when catholic persecution began, they all vanished. They fled up to York, which was still a catholic city, and there took up residence as schoolteachers. It was discovered that in the library there that a young apprentice tutor that was teaching the Lord of the manor's children. He had had access to the Lord's library and in several of the books had written notes. The handwriting is the same as William Shakespeare's. According to the theory, he must've gone with his teachers up to York where he was apprenticed to tutor to a wealthy family and continue his studies. Prior to this, he had already been in school for seven years. He had learned greek, hebrew, latin, french, geography, and english history. He was a fairly credible tutor for children. This theory links perfectly with his appearance in London years later, where he appears with a traveling company. That same company that he appears with in London had performed only months earlier at the manor of the Lord of York.

Mr. Adams knew so much about not only the plays, but also the time frame and surrounding history! It was a really great experience to talk with him, and would encourage any and everyone to try to attend the Shakespeare festival when it comes to town! It Mr. Adams is any indication, I'm sure it's a really neat experience.

Othello and Adaptation to Different Cultures

So, I know Othello wasn't the tragedy I chose to read, but branching out is always good right? Brooke and I tried to watch a Bollywood version of Othello. It was an interesting take on the story. I didn't read the play, but it seemed to stick with the overall storyline fairly well. For details on how this version deviates, you'll have to visit Brooke's blog!

The thing that stuck out to me the most about watching this version, is how translation plays a big part in comprehension! This movie was not in english at all, so we watched it with subtitles. It worked for the most part, but there were certain scenes where jokes and such must be lost in translation, because I had no idea what it meant! I knew they were supposed to be funny, but the humor was lost on me. I think this is due to:

1. Some cultural things are known to the Indian people that I am unaware of

2. Certain words in other languages don't have a translation in English. They have an essence or idea that is only able to be conveyed in that original language

I think this is the case with reading Shakespeare sometimes. We feel like we are reading another language because the wording is so different, and also a lot of what Shakespeare deals with is pertinent to current events.

Marriage Customs During the Time of Shakespeare

So, I feel terrible that this post is going up so late. It's been one of those weeks. But, at least I'm getting a post up right? :) So, as I was reading Romeo and Juliet, it struck me how very young the two protagonists of the story are! Juliet is a mere fourteen years old. And Lady Capulet makes it seem that she's an old maid for not yet being married!

"Well, think of marriage now; younger than you,
Here in Verona, ladies of esteem,
Are made already mothers: by my count,
I was your mother much upon these years
That you are now a maid."

It would seem that young marriage was a common occurrence in Shakespeare's time. I went to the library and did a little digging, and happened across a book titled "Understanding Shakespeare's England". This book highlights the viewpoints and practices that were common at the time Shakespeare authored his works. I went to the section on marriage, and found some interesting facts about marriage practices of the time. Here is a brief list gleaned from the text for your convenience:

1. Elizabethans seldom married for love alone. They considered many other factors in the decision to marry. The idea of getting married to someone that they weren't head over heels for didn't repulse them as it does us in this present day. The middle-class Elizabethan couple may have come fairly close to marry for love.

2. Parents did have total control over who their children would marry. Often the parents loved their children enough to at least have some concern in what they thought, however if they wanted to use their children as pawns for personal advancement, they could and would.

3. The mean age for brides was just under twenty-four years old, and for bridegrooms was just under twenty-seven. Aristocrats tended to marry younger, average age for brides being just over nineteen and for grooms just over twenty-four.

4. The source of Shakespeare's "Romeo and Juliet" was Arthur Brooke's "The Tragical History of Romeus and Juliet. In this work, Juliet's age is specified as sixteen. While this is still very young, Shakespeare purposefully takes off another two years in his adaptation and makes Juliet a mere fourteen.

5. The betrothal of a couple was considered very binding in Elizabethan society, and it seems to have legitimized the sex life of the couple that was to be married. It wasn't uncommon for Elizabethan brides to be pregnant at the time  they actually said their vows. This had no repercussions for the couple so long as they did indeed get married.

6. Elizabethan newleyweds didn't go on a honeymoon. They would ceremoniously be put to bed in the house that had the wedding feast.

7. Brides could be married in while, however it was not as customary as it is today. The connection between white and purity/virginity had not yet come together. A popular color to be wedded in was russet.

8. Marriage was an emblem of harmony, concord, and reconciliation of disparate elements into a perfected whole. Canon law recognized marraige as a sacrament, not merely a civil contract. Divorce was not part of the Elizabethan experience.

Renaissance music - the music of Twelfth Night!

I love music. Music of all kinds. I'd venture to say that not many people my age listen to many classic oldies (Mcguire Sisters, Frank Sinatra, Franki Valli, etc). I'd venture to say that even fewer have taken an interest in Renaissance music! Well, I've had the benefit of listening to a group known as The New World Renaissance band. They have an incredible array of music that is authentic to the Renaissance period. Their main singer, Owain Phyfe, has a bit of a cult following in the Renaissance fair arena. I've grown up hearing my dad play their records, and because of that I developed an early appreciation for this style of music. I'd encourage you to listen to the clip below to get a taste of their music yourself!

 

I want to give the class a better idea of what Renaissance music was, and what distinguishes it from other styles. I went and read this article. Here is a summary of what I found!

THE INSTRUMENTS:

One of the main string instruments of the Renaissance era was the lute. According to Wikipedia, "

Medieval lutes were 4- or 5-course instruments, plucked using a quill as a plectrum. There were several sizes, and by the end of the Renaissance, seven different sizes (up to the great octave bass) are documented. Song accompaniment was probably the lute's primary function in the Middle Ages, but very little music securely attributable to the lute survives from the era before 1500. Medieval and early-Renaissance song accompaniments were probably mostly improvised, hence the lack of written records. In the last few decades of the 15th century, in order to play Renaissance polyphony on a single instrument, lutenists gradually abandoned the quill in favor of plucking the instrument with the fingertips. The number of courses grew to six and beyond. The lute was the premier solo instrument of the 16th century, but continued to be used to accompany singers as well.

Read more about the lute here.

One of the main percussion instruments was the Tambourine. According to Wikipedia, "In the early ages the tambourine was originally a frame drum without the jingles attached to the side. This instrument soon evolved and took on the name of the timbrel during the medieval crusades, at which time it acquired the jingles. The tambourine was often found with a single skin, as it made it easy for a dancer to play. The skin that surrounds the frame is called the vellum, and produces the beat by striking the surface with the knuckles, fingertips, or hand. It could also be played by shaking the instrument, allowing the tambourine's jingles to "clank" and "jingle"."

 

A shawm was one of the woodwind instruments of the Renaissance day. According to Wikipedia,  "A typical oriental shawm is keyless and is about a foot long with seven finger holes and a thumb hole. The pipes were also most commonly made of wood and many of them had carvings and decorations on them. It was the most popular double reed instrument of the renaissance period; it was commonly used in the streets with drums and trumpets because of its brilliant, piercing, and often deafening sound. To play the shawm a person puts the entire reed in their mouth, puffs out their cheeks, and blows into the pipe whilst breathing through their nose."

  

 THE MUSICAL STYLE:

According to this website, here are the main characteristics of Renaissance music!

1. Music still based on modes, but gradually more accidentals creep in.
2. Richer texture in four or more parts. Bass part is added below the tenor.
3. Blending rather than contrasting strands in the musical texture.
4. Harmony. Greater concern with the flow and progression of chords.
5. Church music. Some pieces were intended for 'a cappella' performance. Mainly contrapuntal. Lots of imitation. Some church music was accompanied by instruments - for example polychoral pieces in antiphonal style (Antiphonal - Questions and Answers, Stereo Effect).
6. Secular music (none-religious music. Sacred music is to do with the church) There was lots of vocal pieces and dances, and lots of instrumental pieces (However a lot of the instrumentals were in a vocal style, but sonic were suited to instruments. Vocal music was by far the more important.)
7. The characteristic timbres of Renaissance musical instruments - many forming families.

So basically, there is a quick little overview. Music obviously plays a role in the Twelfth Night play; it opens and ends with song. Hopefully this can help you get a better idea of what that type of music may have been like!

Twelfth Night and She's the Man

I need to start off by saying, She's the Man is an AWESOME MOVIE! So funny. I have to note, however, that there are quite a few differences between the original play and the modern spin-off. Here's a quick list of notable differences:

1. A number of left out characters! Including:
      *Antonio: A friend of Sebastien's, develops a sort of romantic attachment to Sebastien.
      *Malvolio: Yes ladies and gentlemen, he's a person. Not a spider!
      *Sir Toby: Olivia's drunkard uncle. He is pushing for Sir Andrew Aguecheek to court Olivia.
      *Maria: Oliva's lady-in-waiting.
      *Feste: The fool of the play.

2. Olivia refuses Orsino's love because she is mourning the loss of her dead brother.

3. Viola thinks her brother Sebastien is dead, but is hoping for his return.

4. Sir Andrew challenges Cesario (who really is Sebastien) to a duel over the right to Olivia, and it is during this duel that Olivia proposes marriage to Cesario.

5. Malvolio is the focus of a prank masterminded by Maria (Olivia's lady in waiting). Malvolio is given a letter that is supposedly from Olivia. He is tricked into thinking that Olivia is in love with him, and taking extreme measures to prove his love back to her. Olivia thinks Malvolio has gone crazy, and has him imprisoned. This prank is actually a central part of the play.

6. Maria (Olivia's lady-in-waiting) and Sir Toby (Olivia's uncle) get married at the end of the play.


There are many more small deviations from the storyline, however I feel that this encompasses the largest of the differences. I'd be interested in seeing a video production that fits more closely to the actual play. I do have to say though, that She's the Man still holds a special place in my heart. :)

Blame my face - the Psychological of Ugly

So last week, as we were discussing Richard III in my group, we got on the topic of his deformities. Apparently, Richard was a  very unattractive man. At least, that's what Shakespeare portrays him as.
 
This reminded me of another character who was famous for being unattractive, The Phantom of the Opera. The Phantom murdered, kidnapped, blackmailed, stalked...he wasn't the best example for the kids, let's just say that. It got me to wondering. Are evil characters merely portrayed as ugly? So that their outward appearance is a manifestation of their inner character? Or do they feel pushed to behave in such a way because of the way others react to their appearance? In the Phantom of the Opera, towards the end of the movie the Phantom blames his actions on the fact that the world has treated him badly because of his deformity.

I was researching this topic when I found an interesting article on the study of crime here. According to the article, the idea of a connection between crime and certain physical characteristics has been a topic of interest for many men. "The physiognomist Johann Kaspar Lavater (1741–1801) was one of the first to suggest a link between facial figures and crime ^[1]. Victor Hugo referred to his work in Les Misérables, about what he would have said about Thénardier's face. Franz Joseph Gall then developed in 1810 his work on craniology, in which he alleged that crime was one of the behaviors organically controlled by a specific area of the brain. The philosopher Jacob Fries (1773–1843) also suggested a link between crime and physical appearance when he published a criminal anthropology handbook in 1820." The article continues stating that the idea that certain characteristics evidence evil is quite dangerous. The article mentions the fact that this very thing occured in WWII with the Nazi regime. 


It is a very interesting theory. What compels some men and women to such atrocious acts that we'd shudder to even think of them? Could it possibly be a mental imbalance/deformity? And if so, is there any possibility that this could be manifested physically in any way?


Or think of school shootings. Most of the perpetrators are those who felt looked down upon and spurned by their fellow students. This extreme ostracism essentially pushed them to their breaking point, pushed them to murder. Could the psychological effects of this push ordinary people to heinous acts?


It's an interesting concept. 

We are told to never judge a book by it's cover. I still agree with this concept! Beauty is a subjective thing. Different people have different views on what is attractive and what is not. I mean, I don't think Justin Bieber is attractive at all, but there are hordes of girls who would tackle me for saying so (my sister being on of them...), The conclusion that I come to is that the Golden Rule is truly golden, and for a reason! We need to treat people in a manner we'd want to be treated. Be a friend to everyone, cause we never know what a person is going through at any point in time. Who knows, if someone ventured to give Richard or the Phantom a hug once in a while, maybe they would've turned out to be completely productive members of society. ;)

A comparison of "She's the Man" and "Twelfth Night"

So, I don't know if I should ba ashamed to admit this, but I chose to read Twelfth Night because I love the movie She's the Man, which is a modern telling of the play. I'm enjoying reading the play immensely, but while reading it I've noticed that there are quite a few differences between Shakespeare's version and Amanda Bynes's version. So, I plan on watching the movie, and making a list of where it deviates from the original text. Since the focus of my blog is Shakespeare in pop culture, i figured this would be a good way to go! :) Question: would anyone be interested in watching the movie with me? Everyone is welcome! I'm going to watch it tomorrow night at around 7. Let me know! :)