Shakespeare Fans discussion
Group Readings
>
The Merry Wives Of Windsor,Act 1, March 18
So I've read the first page of act 1 in my Collins Complete Shakespeare published in 1903. In the Persons Represented list there are 15 named male characters followed by 4 named 'merry wives' of Windsor.Over in my Norton Complete S (pub 1997) which I use for annotations reference 'The Persons of the Play' lists the characters in relation to each other rather than men first. Times change.
Anyway, if I'm out of order posting this then perhaps it will be appropriate to make "a star chamber matter of it". Thanks to Shallow for the line.
Mod
I've reached out to Tom, our discussion leader and I hope we see him here shortly.
I am going to change the dates on our topic headers....as we are pushed back a bit.
I've been AWOL... yes...but I do have a reason...
NO ONE WAS HURT!!!!
My landlords who live above us had a fire. So we were displaced...and we are not returning to our apartment. We have a new place a neighbour friend had an empty apartment we are renting for a t least two or three months...till we figure things out. I am busy cleaning my husband and I art work...we are both painters and our work got some hopefully minor smoke exposire.
I've washed up things like stainless steel utensils and cookware and glassware...and next week I begin to try to clean the glassware and books.
I plan on wiping down my research books and then putting them in bins with cat litter.
I'm terribly sorry to share heavy news with you all...but we are deciding to trat this event as a blessing and miracle.
We hope to sort out the cleaning up...and proceed with our many projects and palns of which me in this group reading is one.
I also apologize for highjacking this thread...but I cetainly know I owed you all and explanation.
I'm going to read an online version fr now....
Hopefully you are all still up for the reading!!!
Lets do it!!!
Hang in there Candy. Great that you have a place to move to.
Mod
We are hanging in there and doing very well. It’s just the cleaning stuff is a drag.
Here’s hoping this discussion kicks off!
I started discussing a week ago and nobody's commented.
Mod
I suppose its possible the few of us got busy or had life get in the way.
Let's see...
I thought you were going to reset the dates. We've been confused I think.
But you have reset the dates. Sorry I missed that.
Hi Candy, glad you and your family are alright! I'm ready to start the discussion whenever Tom begins - or should we commence without him?
Mod
:)
Mod
Here is a wiki page on these vaults...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mithraism
Some great photos and cessay here...
https://weirditaly.com/2021/05/08/the...
Thanks, Candy. But, honestly, that resonance would probably be too deep for Master Shallow! As I see it he clearly is trying to inflate the importance of his Falstaff complaint (and himself) with the Star Chamber claim, which as my research revealed, was a room in Whitehall Palace that held trials of nobility and/or royal personages too important to be tried in ordinary courts and summoned primarily by the sitting monarch. A commoner making such a claim would only be seen as laughable by Elizabethan audiences - as it was. It's a great point to begin our discussion with, however, as the succeeding banter between Shallow, Slender and Evans which extends from the Star Chamber reference and does introduce "the play's argument" is mostly rhetorical sparring; each character attempting to verbally distinguish themselves with a knit of wit.
Hi Marlin,hope it's okay to comment on something you wrote in the introduction thread that's now been frozen? If not just ignore this!
You said: the "No Fear Shakespeare" approach rankles my nerves.
What does this refer to?
Also out of interest, has anyone actually seen 'Merry Wives' at the theatre? I know that there is always debate about whether some plays only work in performance or in being read, and I would veer towards thinking that comedies need to be seen as they are drier on the page.
Candy wrote: "I've been trying to find research on any possible connection between the chambers for practicing Mitraism...and a star chamber. Aesthetically there is a connection as star decorated ceilings are fo..."There are the remains of a temple to Mithras near Hadrians Wall. I've been to it. Sadly there's no ceiling remaining.
Not far away from the mithreum is Carlisle Cathedral which has a medeival blue and star spangled ceiling.
The star chamber court, as I understand it, was held in a room at Whitehall or Westminster in London, that had a star spangled ceiling.
Clarissa wrote: "Hi Marlin,hope it's okay to comment on something you wrote in the introduction thread that's now been frozen? If not just ignore this!
You said: the "No Fear Shakespeare" approach rankles my ner..."
Hi Clarissa. Not replying to your No Fear Shakespeare comment. I'll leave that to Marlin.
Regarding reading versus seeing a Shakespeare play performed: I have discovered, for me, that reading/studying any Shakespeare play before seeing it in performance greatly enhances my comprehension of and enjoyment of the performance.
I haven't seen Merry Wives but I note in the first few minutes of dialogue so many references and words that I would not immediately know that I think that nearly all of the humour of the lines would have passed me by.
Marlin wrote: "Thanks, Candy. But, honestly, that resonance would probably be too deep for Master Shallow! As I see it he clearly is trying to inflate the importance of his Falstaff complaint (and himself) with t..."Hi Marlin. I too looked up Star Chamber and I think there is more to it than what you said, particularly relating to the opening situation in the play.
As I undertand it the Star chamber court was for lower rank people to take higher rank people to task. But it became open to corruption during Cardinal Woolsey's time especially.
In MWW Shallow Esquire is a court justice himself, but of lower social rank to Sir John Falstaff. He feels that he has been 'disaparaged' by Falstaff and his buddies and he wants the court to make Falstaff apologise publicly.
This situation is one that I think the Star Chamber court was set up for. I read that at the time of the writing of this play the Star Chamber court was running at 700 cases per annum.
I'm getting the feeling that this play could be a political satire rather than simply a 'comedy'.
Take it as you will, James, but I find it laughable that any member of the Tudor or Stuart councils would agree to hear a complaint levied against a figure like Falstaff by a character like Shallow unless they were desperate for entertainment. Shakespeare repeats this comic presentation of legal grievance by local justices to higher authority in several plays. I believe it’s meant to be taken as half-heartedly as it’s presented.
Clarissa wrote: "Hi Marlin,hope it's okay to comment on something you wrote in the introduction thread that's now been frozen? If not just ignore this!
You said: the "No Fear Shakespeare" approach rankles my nerves." What does this refer to?
Hii Clarissa,
No Fear Shakespeare is a “study guide” which presents Shakespeare’s plays in a dual format; the First Folio text on one side and a contemporary English interpretation on the other. I have no qualm with the idea of clarifying Shakespeare’s text for readers but the replacement of the text for contemporary English, particularly for performance, is one I abhore. What is the point of studying - or simply enjoying - a Shakespeare play if it’s no longer in the form it was written to be received? His stories are far from original or intriguing on their own, imo. You can read versions of his plots in countless tales and poems from the Middle Ages back to antiquity. What makes his plays stand out is the way he tells them. If we have to engage our faculties a bit harder to comprehend what’s happening on the stage or on the page than we normally would for today’s standard of entertainment so be it. The rewards of appreciating this obviously gifted poet are more than worth the effort.
Mod
The Star Chamber originally was like what we might think of as a safety valve for average people to keep check and find fair dealings with people well connected...as James says it was a sort of protection for the little people against corruption. Later..."star chamber" became a term for protecting and keeping secret elite corruption. During the time of this play...the Star Chamber was for equinimity and equally trying people elite who could protect themselves by money or power.
In many discussion s here...I have brought up the concept of the monarchy as a mirror or literal idea as the head of the church or spiritual life. For example...if the king is corrupt, crops will die....as a mystical connection. This relates to the Star Chamber...BACK in time but it's too much to write about here right now.
My interest is the rituals in Mithra vaults...as a mystical practice, eveolving into a Star Chamber and the symbolism of the monarchy with a religious role.
No big deal :)
Clarrisa, great question about seeing this play...no I have not seen it.
I think James is on to something that this play also functionss as a satire as well as a comedy. I think it can be ...possible...
Mod
I am going to do some meditations on this...and just scroll by if its boring...I am pursuing for my own interests really :)
The Jesus bloodline refers to the proposition that a lineal sequence of descendants of the historical Jesus has persisted to the present time. The claims frequently depict Jesus as married, often to Mary Magdalene, and as having descendants living in Europe, especially France but also the UK. Differing and contradictory Jesus bloodline scenarios, as well as more limited claims that Jesus married and had children, have been proposed in numerous modern books. Some such claims have suggested that Jesus survived the crucifixion and went to another location such as France, India or Japan.
Ideas that Jesus Christ might have been married have a long history in Christian theology, though the historical record says nothing on the subject.[1] Bart D. Ehrman, who chairs the Department of Religious Studies at the University of North Carolina, commented that, although there are some historical scholars who claim that it is likely that Jesus was married, the vast majority of New Testament and early Christianity scholars find such a claim to be historically unreliable
Much of the bloodline literature has a more specific focus, on a claimed marriage between Jesus and Mary Magdalene. There are indications in Gnosticism of the belief that Jesus and Mary Magdalene shared an amorous, and not just a religious relationship. The Gnostic Gospel of Philip tells that Jesus "kissed her often" and refers to Mary as his "companion".[3] Several sources from the 13th-century claim that an aspect of Catharist theology was the belief that the earthly Jesus had a familial relationship with Mary Magdalene. An Exposure of the Albigensian and Waldensian Heresies, dated to before 1213 and usually attributed to Ermengaud of Béziers, a former Waldensian seeking reconciliation with the mainstream Catholic Church, would describe Cathar heretical beliefs including the claim that they taught "in the secret meetings that Mary Magdalen was the wife of Christ".[4] A second work, untitled and anonymous, repeats Ermengaud's claim.[4] The anti-heretic polemic Historia Albigensis written between 1212 and 1218 by Cistercian monk and chronicler Peter of Vaux de Cernay, gives the most lurid description, attributing to Cathars the belief that Mary Magdalene was the concubine of Jesus.
"Christ and Mary Magdalene" (Peter Paul Rubens, 1618)
The Jesus bloodline is an interesting discussion point, Candy, do you know if the belief was discussed with any credence at all in Shakespearean Times?I think lawyers are the most mentioned career across Shakespeare's plays, so it's interesting how this one starts with a mention and also thinking about what law meant to Shakespeare either in reality or as a metaphor.
I have seen 'Merry Wives' twice randomly, in these two RSC productions if anyone is interested:
https://www.theguardian.com/stage/200...
https://www.theguardian.com/stage/201...
I enjoyed them both, although my enduring memory of the Judi Dench/Simon Callow one is that the revolving stage broke and they showed themselves as clearly the most experienced actors on stage with how calmly they dealt with it.
Candy wrote: "I am mostly interested in the history of the Star Chamber...and Mithra vaults for my own purposes. Not so much the character Shallow. Although that is fun too. And I was also wondering if anyone el..."Did you see that the Star Chamber court as referenced in the play was abolished by an act of parliament in the 1640s when it was considered that Charlse the first had used it to his own ends? His own end came shortly after when he was beheaded by order of Cromwells parliament, mainly for being the king.
Interestingly the Order of the Garter which was founded by Edward the second in Windsor was and is full of royalty and aristocracy and is alive and well to this day.
Shakespeare makes reference in MWW to the Garter Inn which actually existed in Windsor at the time and for centuries after. At some point it was expanded into a hotel called, wait for it. the Star and Garter. As a result of the pandemic this hotel has only recently closed.
In Shakespeare's time there was an affiliate group to the Order of the Garter composed of lesser knights who were known as 'poor knights'. There were I believe 26 of these knights. Perhaps further on in the play there will be a suggestion that Sir John Falstaff was one of these fellows.
Marlin wrote: "Take it as you will, James, but I find it laughable that any member of the Tudor or Stuart councils would agree to hear a complaint levied against a figure like Falstaff by a character like Shallow..."Did you mean light heartedly and not half heartedly Marlin?
'A figure like Falstaff'as you say is a man with a Sir in front of his name. By this time in England people like Shallow were getting damned fed up with the aristocracy and their cavalier attitude toward anyone that they considered below them. I think there is intent in this comedy to point out social ills of the time.
And forty years later a civil war came to right some of these wrongs.
Candy wrote: "I am mostly interested in the history of the Star Chamber...and Mithra vaults for my own purposes. Not so much the character Shallow. Although that is fun too. And I was also wondering if anyone el..."Have you checked out londonmithreum.com? A temple to Mithras was excavated by archaeologists in London in the 1950s.
I can take you up to Hadrians Wall to view the soldier's Mithras Temple if you visit England and you have the time.
New point but connected to the political aspect that I see in this play in the opening dialogue. I think that the inclusion of the Welsh parson though meant to be funny with his Welsh accent and quaint and even naive ways is another allusion to the Star Chamber. In Tudor england at this time the Star Chamber court was known to be used corruptly by English lords and landed class to take advantage of the Welsh and steal their land by stealth. So I have read.
JamesD wrote: Interestingly the Order of the Garter which was founded by Edward the second."The Order of the Garter was founded by Edward III 1348.
I must have misremembered Tim. Thanks. I knew that it was in the 1300s, so by the end of Tudor times it was a venerable institution of 250 years.
Hot venison pasties no less. What's on offer at the Page household half way through scene 1.This is where the advertised 16 year old virgin Ann is available for marriage and expects £700 coming her (£70,000 in present day terms I think) as a lure to the unscrupulous types.
These are not poor people.
The only common people I can see are the servants. At least we have no kings and princes and such higher ups which is a nice change for R Bard Bill.
Mod
Clarissa, I don't know if I can find direct reference to Sakespeare talking about the Jesis bloodline...thats sort of what I'm thinking avout suring this reading.
Loving all the energy and comments os far!!!
Love these discussions!
Mod
if you want to read the whole paper...message me and I'll share...but here is an excerpt...
Through the Renaissance mass media of poetry Bolton cast Jones as an allegory for Mercury, god of thieves. The covert campaign combined meaningful images with entertainment in order to transport pre-literate knowledge and Roman philosophy to a fundamentalist society at odds with Catholic and intellectual Europe. To help understand how Jones did this we can look at his production of Oberon. Jones designs three stage flats that go one in front of the other slowly revealing leitmotifs.. On the first flat he painted a mound and a cavern. When the scene changes, the flat opens from the centre of two flats revealing a painted dome mirroring the shape the mound and cavern. (5) Jones mashed up a paleo-setting to Vitruvian and Roman design with a narrative of King Arthur transcending time. John Peacock writes quote “The affective power of the masque was to instill a whole unknown history of art.” end quote.(6)
Every detail of a masque was allegorical. Food was to be filling oneself with sustenance and knowledge. Table talk was literal and poetic. Diners were taking in knowledge and their conversation was expected to impart knowledge. This transfer of knowledge through food was to educate beyond class and the bourgeoisie would be given “entree” or initiation into this covert social education. We still use the word “entree” in restaurants from that effort. (7)
Stuffed foods such as pies and pastries symbolized the outer pastry shell as the body and the stuffing as the soul or mind. For children attending a masque, books were made out of edible sweetmeats. (9) One such Masque where knowledge, and specifically celestial knowledge, is tied to consuming has been described by Roy Strong, quote “The Queen Dowager brought the fêtes to a close with a banquet in an Enchanted Room. A table descended in layers bearing sugared confections of extraordinary invention in vessels of glass and porcelain, while above was a ceiling across which the planets and stars moved and from which comfits and perfumes rained down upon the feasters.” unquote. (10)
Shakespeare ended Titus Andronicus baking the heads of Demitrias and Chivron into juicy pies and serving them at a banquet. He not only removed his grievances but he consumed what was contained in their heads. Shakespeare’s most intelligent, wise and lovable character Falstaff was referred to as a chewet by his beloved student Prince Hal. Hal also called him a hodgepodge. A chewet is a lovely pastry stuffed with meat, fruit and spices. A hodgepodge was a greasy delicious stew. (8) Plato compares Socrates to the martyr Marsyas and to the statues Silenus made by Athenian craftsmen which are hollow goatmen opening to reveal beautiful figurines of gods. (11) Inigo Jones casts satyrs and Silenus in Oberon mentioned earlier.
Poor Knights of WindsorThe Poor Knights were under funded during the medieval period until Henry VIII's will established new terms that were acted upon by Elizabeth I.
Under the Elizabethan statutes of 1559 the Dean and Canons of Windsor were granted land.
This was to provide
the housing of 13 knights with a pay of 12 pence per a day.
A uniform
‘One Gown of four yards of the colour of Red, and a Mantle of Blue or Purple Cloth, of five yards’, with an embroidered Cross of St George without the Garter on the left shoulder.
Knights to be unmarried and obey the commands of the Dean and Canons of Windsor. One of them to be chosen as a Governor.
Knights were commanded not to ‘haunt the Town, the Ale-houses, the Taverns’, nor to ‘call any woman into their Lodgings, without it be upon a reasonable cause’.
Source
https://www.stgeorges-windsor.org/ima...
That's priceless Tim. Seems there were quite a few Falstaffs on the Poor Knights of the Garter ticket.Are they indeed the Merry Wives of Windsor married to the Garter order out of necessity?
Candy wrote: "This is a side note...but here is a little "taste" if some of the research I was doing about allegorical stuff in the Renaissance...if you want to read the whole paper...message me and I'll share..."
Your notes about Titus Andronicus (yet another play I've never engaged with) regarding cooking the heads of Demetrius and Chivron reminds me of that wonderful film by Peter Greenaway - The Cook, the Thief, his wife and her Lover. The end scene where the thief is cooked and served up on a table.
Not sure what's to come in MWW but some of it I suspect will be culinary.
I'm really impressed by the opening scene of this play. Each sentence is laden not just with humor but much information about about social hirearchies in Tudor England. A number of the words, coram, custalorum, ratalorum, armigero, luces I didn't know at all. Looked them all up.
I love the turn of 'luce' to 'louse' to point out a person who may be less than they wish to be seen.
And, "The luce is the fresh fish; the salt fish is an old coat" I don't quite get it but it looks and sounds great and funny even though I don't quite get the joke........ and then immediately connecting to the intricasies of family coats of arms when marrying happens leads on to a major subject of the play where marry and marrying are key words to be played with.
So I wonder when some scholars suggest that Shakespeare wrote this play in two weeks! I'm impressed. I know or assume that he was using a known story outline.....still, 2 weeks?.
I've browsed through this long first act and it appears rich on all levels. Now to re-browse before venturing onto Act 2.
It's a bit odd though having Falstaff from the 1400s appearing 200 years later and not much the worst for wear in a Tudor England setting.
Mod
Host. Thou'rt an emperor, Caesar, Keisar, and Pheezar. I
will entertain Bardolph; he shall draw, he shall
tap: said I well, bully Hector?
Falstaff. Do so, good mine host. 315
Host. I have spoke; let him follow.
[To BARDOLPH]
Let me see thee froth and lime: I am at a word; follow.
[Exit]
Falstaff. Bardolph, follow him. A tapster is a good trade: 320
an old cloak makes a new jerkin; a withered
serving-man a fresh tapster. Go; adieu.
Bardolph. It is a life that I have desired: I will thrive.
Pistol. O base Hungarian wight! wilt thou the spigot wield?
Nym. He was gotten in drink: is not the humour conceited?
Falstaff. I am glad I am so acquit of this tinderbox: his
thefts were too open; his filching was like an
unskilful singer; he kept not time.
Nym. The good humour is to steal at a minute's rest.
Pistol. 'Convey,' the wise it call. 'Steal!' foh! a fico
for the phrase!
Falstaff. Well, sirs, I am almost out at heels.
Pistol. Why, then, let kibes ensue.
Bardolph. It is a life that I have desired: I will thrive.
I love the tapster images and cloak and jerkin (vest right?) I remember looking up some of these words a few years ago...especially "cony"
also cony, "rabbit," c. 1200, abstracted from Anglo-French conis, Old French coniz, plurals of conil "long-eared rabbit" (Lepus cunicula) from Latin cuniculus (source of Spanish conejo, Portuguese coelho, Italian coniglio), the small, Spanish variant of the Italian hare (Latin lepus). The word perhaps is from Iberian Celtic (classical writers say it is Hispanic).
Middle English had two forms: cony, conny, also coning, cunin, conyng; Old French had conil alongside conin. Apparently the plural form conis (from conil, with the -l- elided) was taken into English and regularly single-ized as cony. The Old French form in -n was borrowed in Dutch (konijn) and German (Kaninchen, a diminutive), and is preserved in the surname Cunningham (from a place-name in Ayrshire). Rabbits not being native to northern Europe, there was no Germanic word for them.
Rabbit arose 14c. to mean the young of the species, but gradually pushed out the older word 19c., after British slang picked up coney as a punning synonym for cunny "cunt" (compare connyfogle "to deceive (a woman) in order to win sexual favors"). The word was in the King James Bible (Proverbs xxx.26, etc.), however, so it couldn't be entirely dropped, and the solution was to change the pronunciation of the original short vowel (rhyming with honey, money) to rhyme with bony, stony. In the Old Testament, the word translates Hebrew shaphan "rock-badger."
Association with "cheating" is from coney-catcher, "A term made famous by [Robert] Greene in 1591, and in great vogue for 60 years after" [OED]
CONY-CATCHER. A sharper, or cheat. Minshew has well expressed the origin of the term: A conie-catcher, a name given to deceivers, by a metaphor, taken from those that rob warrens, and conie-grounds, using all means, sleights, and cunning to deceive them, as pitching of haies before their holes, fetching them in by tumblers, &c. [Nares, "Glossary"]
Mod
He uses a lot of words within a dozen lines that stand out because they mess with your mind and meanings...
And this by Falstaff here...
Falstaff. O, she did so course o'er my exteriors with such a
greedy intention, that the appetite of her eye did
seem to scorch me up like a burning-glass! Here's 365
another letter to her: she bears the purse too; she
is a region in Guiana, all gold and bounty. I will
be cheater to them both, and they shall be
exchequers to me; they shall be my East and West
Indies, and I will trade to them both. Go bear thou 370
this letter to Mistress Page; and thou this to
Mistress Ford: we will thrive, lads, we will thrive.
Cheater and exchequer...for example. They just stand off the page to me...as mirrors/connectioed/inversions of sorts if only with the sounds/rhymes.
And that mirrors his "mixing up" his flirtations...by writing TWO women. So silly man that the women wouldn't talk to each other? He's so naive.
Oh yes Falstaff is naive and silly and this makes him more likeable I think. He's so transparent. He's no Iago that's for sure. No Desdemonas will be dying on Falstaff's watch!Shakspeare's setting up a formulaic farce situation for the sake of comedy is he not? A Falstaff has become an amusing anachronism in Tudor times Shakespeare might be suggesting.
One of the stories around the play is that Queen Elizabth loved the Falstaff character and suggested another play with Falstaff in it. And Shakespeare responded with Falstaff in a different context to the Henry plays. I think Queen elizabeth got 'played' on this one. Shakespeare has the last laugh. Perhaps?
Candy wrote: "I agree James this is so well written and lively. I'm laughing out loud at some of the words...although maybe some are just spelled wrong...I'm reading online...so it can be sketchy. (I found a com..."'Coney catching' (gaining advantage by deceiving and trickery, but also catching women) is what Falstaff and his cronies are intent on doing doing but are they up for it? Seems like they are rather 'down at heels' and may have resorted to rabbit catching (coney catching) on someone else's land, also known as poaching.
Mod
It's possible that Falstaff is not even Falstaff.
I think youre right maybe Shakespeare didn't want to be a dnacing chicken...just writing a play because he was told to...or more in line...I think with your feeling of satire.
I think Falstaff being so utterly a different person...is part of the sign of a satire. It's a clue...this is not about wisdom. Harold Bloom thought that (aw I can't believe I'm saying Harold Bloom in the past tense!) ROP sweet prince Harold Bloom!
Bloom believed this was possibly a critique of Ben Jonsons writing. I like the idea that it is an insult or sature directed at QE too.
JamesD wrote: 'A figure like Falstaff'as you say is a man with a Sir in front of his name. By this time in England people like Shallow were getting damned fed up with the aristocracy and their cavalier attitude toward anyone that they considered below them. I think there is intent in this comedy to point out social ills of the time.
And forty years later a civil war came to right some of these wrongs.
I beg your pardon? Falstaff, as I will continue to refer to him, is a deliberate figure of fun in a play which betrays little to no evidence of warring classes or serious social ills. Please provide us the evidence of either.
Hello gang, and well done on such a lively discussion. I thought I would join in, as the number of readers is not so great. So I'm reading it again. I think my earlier comments in https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...
are relevant, where yes (to Clarissa) I have seen the play, done live.
Re Marlin's last post, the evidence he wants is just the opening of the play surely. Falstaff versus Shallow may not be a class difference but there is a culture difference of course. Shallow is part of the new upper gentry who believes in property, work and the rule of law, Falstaff is part of an older aristocratic tradition and, like Pistol, thinks of honest labour as demeaning. ("O base Hungarian wight! wilt thou the spigot wield?"). Access to the court of Star Chamber is a tricky one, but the law itself was immensely complicated in those days, with different courts following different precedents, rules and procedures. Perhaps that is why there was so much violence then, when there was no police force or effective legal system to sort out society's grievances. Alexander Pym (see wikipedia) father of John Pym, took a case to Star Chamber, so I don't see why Shallow might not have.
And (to Candy) I have been to San Clemente in Rome twice in my life - magical - and when I came across "star chamber" in school history, thought it was a lovely name.
I think to get the best out of TMWOW you need to (1) forget the "other Falstaff" of the Henry plays (JamesD is well placed there, and I also have never read Henry IV or Henry V) and (2) ignore the extensive accretion of myth that strangely surrounds this play. Even if it were true that it was commissioned by Elizabeth - a most fantastic story - that cannot be a subtitute for critically thinking of what the play is really about.
In the famous opening, is not the point that Shallow can get no redress from Falstaff, which prepares us for what the "Merry Wives" can do?
I've often been struck that there is one aspect of S that is of no interest to S fans, which is "Shakespeare and opera". Actually I think that is a blessing! But here is a sample, from youtue,
Otto Nicolai - Die lustigen Weiber von Windsor - Overture
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HGZuD...
Very nice to listen to, but it hardly evokes TMWOW for me. Still popular in Germany however. Here is Maria Mirabella's comment, who adds more emoticons the more she likes a piece of music:
Maria💛Mirabella
1 month ago
🌹❤❤❤Vielen Dank Fledermaus 💐🎭⚘HERRLICH SCHÖNES Ouvertüre des deutschen Komponisten Otto Nicolai⚘🌟Ein Wunderbares Porträt 💐🌹💐🌟MEISTERSTÜCK 🌟🌹💐🌹👌BRAVO 🎵😙Ich bin ERSTAUNT............💎PRÄCHTIGER💎.........:)))🎶🎵🌟🎻🎺🎶🎭🌹🌹🌹👑🇩🇪🇩🇪🇩🇪🇩🇪🇩🇪👑❤❤❤👍❗🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌹 DANKE SCHÖN 💖...Ich wünsche dir den BESTEN Tag🌹🍇🥂🍾🎵☀️⚘💋💋
Martin wrote: "Shakespeare and opera...."There is also Antonio Salieri's Falstaff ossia Le tre burle (The Three Jokes). This is more in the style of Mozart Marriage of Figaro. The plot is streamlined with fewer characters. Mr Slender now has a wife. The plot centres more on Falstaff.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dOKkD...
Tim, that is amazing! How do you know this stuff? Italian with Russian subtitles is a bit challenging: I wonder if the italian libretto is on the internet anywhere ...
Martin wrote: "Hello gang, and well done on such a lively discussion. I thought I would join in, as the number of readers is not so great. So I'm reading it again. I think my earlier comments in https://www.goo..."
Thanks for joining in Martin. And thanks for your support regarding my opinion that the play is, at least in the first act, and from the outset, addressing conflict between the 'old school' upper class the contemporary middle and upper class who are doing quite well for themselves. It's all enlivened by the humor.
I have made various points about this in posts over the past two weeks but you have said it more succinctly.
Falstaff the character was killed off after Hal became king and did not reward his old friend for his Falstaffian loyalty.
Sir John Falstaff in MWW is a 'ressurection' , back by popular demand to fulfill a role in a contemporary comedy. And he comes with his three side kicks from the olden days and also and updated Mistress Quickly to add to the fun.
I hope you will move over to Act 2 soon as we have been discussing there for nearly a week already.
Martin wrote: "Tim, that is amazing! How do you know this stuff? Italian with Russian subtitles is a bit challenging: I wonder if the italian libretto is on the internet anywhere ..."
Arden 3 Merry Wives has a section on music. Also there is a list
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mer...
Vaughan Williams Sir John in Love. Just one of many on youtube:
starts at 8:40
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H13Vw...
Tim,Well what a strange chance! Yesterday I went to the city library here in Norwich and borrowed that very book. I read you message today, and "Salieri" in the index immediately led my to p.91.
I have read that, paradoxically, the film "Amadeus" led to a new interest in Salieri and a revival of his music.
Mod
Since we are all still getting our copies of the play in order...I'll wait to adjust the dates on when we aim to begin.
Thank you Tom for being the group leader....appreciate that!