Shakespeare Fans discussion

Am I the only person whose favourite play is 'All's Well That End's Well'? I loved the BBC version,have the DVD, have geekishly read a lot of critcism on it.
I don't take the view that the ending is meant cynically, I like a romantic interpretation myself.
Strange, perhaps, in a feminist...

Jessica

Jessica, AWTEW ("All's Well That End's Well") was a great hit at least for me and Candyminx when we did the group read of the play here two years ago,

http://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/9...

(I believe there is nothing "geekish" about reading criticism. It requires no apology.)

I see Tillyard's "S's problem plays" is on your book list. This idea that AWTEW is problematic of course goes back to the Victorians, who found it offensive. Tillyard was a great critic, but hardly helps the case for the play when he describes it as "generally agreed to be some sort of failure" (I quote from memory), and then admits to never having seen it performed! What did you think of Tillyard's book?

I don't really have a favourite play, but if pressed would choose "All's Well".

Hello, great to speak to you.

Fancy finding someone else who likes AWTEW best! I agree about Tillyard's comment,not good publicity. I think it was so rarely performed then but I don't find the play a failure at all, though I sometimes wonder if some text was lost in the last scene.

I note that Tillyard comments on how brilliant the plotting is, how tightly the whole is constructed.

I found the bit of his book on AWTEW really good because it made Bertram make sense to me. I didn't agree with the critics who interpret his reptentence or his words about having started to love Helena now that he had lost her as insincere,and the play's title meant cynically. Still, I found it hard to reconcile sincerity with his awful attitude towards Diana in the last scene.

I thought Tillyard's interpretation, that Bertram was just an inadequate, gruff, physically brave but morally cowardly youth was very perceptive. If Bertram was inarticulate, then, 'Both, both, o pardon!' would be the best that he could manage. It is notable that the only time when he is articulate, he is being insincere, as when he flatters Diana in his attempted seduction.

The play does perform far better than it reads, I think, but I think it reads quite well.

Apparently the acclaimed 1967 RSC version with Ian Richardson was filmed and the film lost at the BBC- I think I heard that. A real shame, I'd have loved to see that.

I thought Ian Charleson made an excellent horribly sullen Bertam in the BBC version, and it is very striking the way he is all tender smiles for Helena at the end. Helena was really good, too, and I thought Parolles brilliant.

I never have quite understood why Parolles, who didn't dislike Helena, was so awful in encouraging Bertram to run off. I think it's been suggested it was because he wanted to escape from Lafeu's scorn. What do you think?

Jessica

Jessica,

Well, you've got me thinking about it all over again, and I've just read again Tillyard's essay on All's Well, disagreeing with everything, but annoyed that I'm not clever enough to have an easy refutation of all his points. Perhaps the problem today is trying to see why there ever was a category "problem plays". Surely this is just a historical relic now? As if they are not all problematical... Is there a better definition of "problem play" than a play the Victorians felt uncomfortable with?

Tillyard gets on the right track when he finds Olivia marrying Sebastian in mistake for Viola "equally disgusting" as Bertram making love to Helena in mistake for Diana. But he then it seems to me goes wrong in supposing the different reaction that people of Tillyard's generation felt to these two things is a failure of Shakespeare's judgement rather than an audience prejudice.

Ian Charleson's Bertram was excellent, I agree. Bertram was often done as a sort of booby, I believe. But that BBC production was wonderful, and indeed helped change the way AWTEW is perceived. Donald Sinden as the King was also a great invention.

My experience of the group read of AWTEW is that the male readers got caught up in character-morality and motives, female readers in the sense of magic that the play creates (although truth to tell, there were few enough of us doing the read.)

I take it Parolles, who like Sir Toby and Falstaff is a sponger, wants Bertram away from the good influences of Roussillion and the Court so he can get him more fully under his own control. (Do you know Jonson's Every Man in his Humour? There is a comparable character, Captain Bobadil, in the play. -- braggart, sponger and coward.)

I'm not sure why you thought the last scene is missing some text. I remember once reading that you'd expect Lafeu's daughter to appear, but it would surely be a mistake to introduce a marriage partner for Bertram who would then have to stand aside when his wife comes onstage.

Hello again from Wales. Interesting that you say most Goodreads people are across the channel...

Tillyard seems to think that Shakespeare's imagination only 'caught fire' a couple of times and that this leads to a 'defective poetical style'. I have to say I didn't notice the style as a defect. Perhaps the poetry doesn't come up to the other plays, but the characterisation, which Tillyard admits to be excellent, with such a fascinating combination of a 'fairy tale' plot and believable people,and the interesting story made me unaware of the supposed poetical shortcomings.

I am always interested in analysis, moral issues raised by stories and motivation - I've never thought of myself as having a masculine brain (I'm very bad spatially, for instance), but you never know. It is certainly true that when I read a book I always seem to bore friends by going in for 'Yes, but why' questions and they say, 'Oh, I don't know, I hadn't noticed that' and seem to regard it as an eccentricity of mine! The books on my shelves are one half fiction, one half non-fiction.

I take your point about Parolles, as Bertram's bathotic evil genius, wishing to get him away to increase his influence, and had he stayed with Helena, she would be a threat to Parolles position. But it does seem odd for a physical coward to wish to go and fight in a war - a sure way of being exposed?
Critics often remark that Parolles doesn't fool himself about what he is - he knows himself to be a lying opportunist and coward, so that is rather a puzzle, which is why I wondered if a desire to escape from further humiliation at Lafeu's hands forces his hand.

I think Tillyard's descripton of how Bertram sustains shock after shock in the 'trial scene' but tries to put on an act of bravado is perceptive. I think he is meant to be quite guilty about Helan's 'gong off and dying', I suppose Jacobian's believed more in 'dying of a broken heart' even if Shakespeare himself wrote the famous 'men have died and been eaten by worms, but not for love'.

Re: the missing text, I think since reading Tillyard's analysis of Bertram's character the ending seems more adequate to me if he is depicted as bad at expressing himself, but a slightly fuller apology would have been nice, and maybe some indication that he is sorry for having so traduced Diana? But no doubt he has problems with making apologies. I can see an appearance of Maudlin or a speech for her would make no dramatic sense.

I suppose Maudlin is introduced as an explanation for Bertram's sheer nastiness to Helena during the 'choosing scene'? I think I said above that I take the 'non cynical' view that Bertram does appreciate Helena in retrospect.

My goodness, I have gone on. You can see why people who enjoy reading for the affect groan!

Yes, the King was very well done. I was a bit disappointed with the family seat at Roisillion, which seemed to be a moderate mansion rather than what Shakespeare calles 'a palace'.

I haven't actually read any Johnson. That character sounds intriguing.

Jessica

Me neither, that is to say, I did not notice the style as a defect. But Tillyard thinks rhyming couplets are a "Bad Idea". He doesn't ask himself why S moves into rhyme when he does. In the BBC version, Helena's rhymed cure of the King is accompanied by music, which perfectly brings out the magical intention of the rhyme. When Tillyard gets all this wrong, can we wonder he finds a lack of inspiration in the poetry?

I think the poetry of AWTEW wonderful, that is, parallel to the poetry of the other plays.

My goodness you did go on! (Just kidding!) But I loved your comments. Do you know Measure for Measure? They are closely connected (as Dr Johnson noted.) In my own mind I see M for M as a Christian version of a pagan AWTEW. M for M has had a similar fate to AWTEW, except that M for M is now regularly performed, while AWTEW still struggles for the recognition it deserves.

I'll try & get Candy to add something here ....

Hello, Martin. Bring on Candy!

Yes,I like M for M too. I like the theme of reconciliation and forgiveness in both plays, and this last scene of that seems to have been an idea that fascinated Shakespeare at one time, as in 'A Winter's Tale' and 'Cyumeline'. Did WW Lawrence say so?
This is a bit off subject, but did you see the BBC version of M for M? I haven't yet, and wonder if whoever played Angelo was good? I always felt sorry for him, I suppose because everyone tends to hate him.
Also off subject: - I heard somewhere that Ian Charleson plays Augustus in Anthony and Cleopatra, too.Was he as good in that?

Jessica

Well, I have not read WW Lawrence. The BBC series of Shakespeare from the 70s/80s was very up-and-down. I think the worst was Twelfth Night with Felicity Kendall doing Viola just like Barbara from the Good Life, and her identical twin looking as rugged as Schwarzenegger, but with a blonde curly wig. But some were excellent, and M for M was excellent. Angelo was played by Tim Piggott Smith, and he got it just right, for the style in which M for M was produced.

A & C, on the other hand, did not come alive for me, despite the good cast. There seemed to be no real chemistry between the protagonists. But that's a personal reaction ... Charleson's Augustus seemed to me too much like his Bertram -- dry and controlled. I was hoping for something different.

Candy is touring America -- or something. I'm sure she'll drift back here someday.

Hello, Martin.
Lawrence was the first, I think, to point out the fairytale elements in AWTEW, and to point out the absurdity of applying Victorian squeamishness about the bed trick to Jacobeans.
M for M sounds like worth seeing, then. I wonder why Charleson chose to do that act twice? In A and C Augustus seemed to be being Machiavellian, giving insincere promises to Cleopatra, wanting to parade her in a truimph, that must have been an intriguing part to play.
As I said above, the way Charleson's Bertram melted towards Helena at the end after such coldness was very satisfying, but if he was just like that non stop as Augustus that would be dull.
I do want to see a live production of AWTW someday, but I don't want to see a cynical one,I want a nice sincerely repentant Bertram at the end and some of the modern ones are ironic, getting him to pull wild faces after his speech, etc...

I hope Candy comes back soon!

Jessica

Okay, I have WW Lawrence's book on the problem plays here in my hand. Before I get into it, Jessica, have you read it? --- just wondered!

Of course I'm not suggesting Charleson played the roles in a similar way consciously, it's just that they seemed similar to me.

Jessica, I could lend you the BBC versions lovefilm-style if you wish (I have the complete set).

Martin,

Thanks for much for the offer, which is really generous, but I am terrible at IT,and may not have the right stuff on my PC to make it possible? I've seen Lear, Two Gentleman of Verona besides my favourite All's Well That End's Well.
I read Lawrence's section on AWTEW three years ago, but don't have a copy to hand, sadly...My recollection is slightly rusty, but that he stressed the folklore and fulfilling of task aspect and quoted from various folk tales, but as for his character analysis, apart from the fact that he approved of Helena and was sure that Shakespeare meant us to as well, I don't recollect that well at all. I skimmed through the rest of the book, I must admit.

Will be fascinated by your detailed comments!

Jessica

Well, I've just read WW Lawrence's Chapter 2. I suppose you have to take into account its age (he was born in 1876), but I really think it has no value today. WWL tells us that Shakespeare was "no Ibsen", "no Strindberg", who could create their own plots to match their characters' psychology, instead he was stuck with a dumb audience expecting fairy stories, "no education or literary training ... they looked to the stage to tell them the tales that they knew, and like children today resented any radical alterations." One is reminded of LC Knights, in his demolition of Bradley, saying that Bradley's conception of a play was of something by Ibsen. For Bradley, Lear is confused, Macbeth fragmentary and Antony and Cleopatra badly constructed. It is significant that WWL's book is dedicated to Bradley.

The key thing about WWL is that he takes no interest in Shakespeare's poetry. The plays, as he presents them, might just as well have been written in prose. He only mentions the verse once, in this telling observation,

"We do not object that the characters, even the most realistic of them, speak in blank verse, because these theatrical artificialities have survived on the stage down to our own days."

It is a "theatrical artificiality" to which we "don't object".

He defends the play against Victorian repugnance by showing the folk-history of the plot (and I did find his retelling of these old tales very interesting and entertaining), and arguing that Shakespeare, limited as he was by the conventions of his age, was constrained not to alter it.

More in a mo' ...

WWL begins with a very interesting collection of critical judgements against the play. But I think the real objection was never stated, and only gets hinted at when the male critics complain that Bertram, so averse to Helena until the end, finally accepts her so willingly. Bertram suddenly realises that Helena was after all the woman who gave him a night of great sex. The exclusively male group of late 19th century commentators were none too happy with this.

One of Tillyard's observations (from his chapter on M for M) is extremely perceptive here: these male readers have,

"an unfortunate habit of treating Shakespeare's heroines as a repertory of ideal brides."

And he gives examples, "wasn't Beatrice something of a risk, and would't you be safer with Portia?"

Jessica said: I was a bit disappointed with the family seat at Rossillion, which seemed to be a moderate mansion rather than what Shakespeare calles 'a palace'.

Ah, you have to be careful there! The word 'palace' is an addition of modern editors, and is not Shakespeare's. The original had no scene descriptions, see

http://internetshakespeare.uvic.ca/Li...

Hi Martin

I'd forgotten Lawrence's belittling comments, but yes, he does seem to underestimate both a Jacobean audience's understanding and the poetry in the plays sadly. I suppose he was making the point that they would have rejected the 'cynical' modern interpretation, and as I am sure you've noticed, I do myself. I think when Shakespeare set out to write a tragedy, he made an unhappy ending, and when he wrote a comedy, he made a happy one.

Yes, I think that Helena and Bertram DO have such a joyful night together that they both realise the value of this,'wonderous kind' and so on, and all connected (possibly) with her speech to Parolles in the beginning that some people say is about how he will act when flirting at court, but some say is to do with what she will be to him when she surrenders her (despised by Parolles) viriginity to him.
Odd that he should be so horrible to Diana when he thought that it was she, but maybe that adds to his fear of her?
I didn't realise that there were no scenes given at all in Shakespeare. Now that is interesting, and I will follow that up.

Jessica

Hello!

Fantastic discussion and I am so sad to have come late to the party. I've tried to find Tillyards essay online, but no luck. If I can get to a library I will try.

Yes, I am still on the road...but after we go to Vancouver Island, we will begin to drive east and return to Chicago. I do have Goodreads set up as an App on my phone, but haven't had time to visit till just now.

Really really enjoyed this discussion and hope Jessica you consider a group read with us here in the near future!

Cheers for now
Candy

Candy,

Thanks and I am so glad that you enjoed the discussion so far, and will be joining it at some point in the future! EMW Tillyard, 'Shakespeare's Problem Plays' Harmondsworth, Penguin, 1965? I don't go along with everything he says, but I found as I think I said above that when you analyse Bertram and his shabby deeds and capitulation to Helena at the end in the light of his being a callow youth, the problems regarding the liklihood of the ending just vanish.
Martin was kind enough to offer me all the plays if I could use the IT to transfer them, but I am hopeless at IT, don't have the technology, sadly, and don't know how. Duh!
A group reading sounds good. How does one go about that?

Jessica
xx




Thanks

Jessica, do we encourage Candy to get hold of Tillyard's book or not? I think it is a little dated myself. Perhaps we need a section in "Shakespeare Fans" on the books really worth reading. For Tillyard, I'd definitely recommend his The Elizabethan World Picture.

I needed a break from the Shakespeare reads (having done it now for two years), but wouldn't mind tackling something new.

Something we should really do, I think, is read the phoenix and the turtle. Very short, definitely by Shakespeare, like nothing else. We can argue forever about what it means.

Jessica, when I volunteered lending you the BBC plays "lovefilm style" I simply meant that I send them to you one at a time on request through post, and you return them when you've seen them. You'd have to trust me with a postal address. Anyway, the offer still stands.

Martin, that is so kind. How can I pm a postal address to you without making it public? Email, maybe frm your homepage?

I'd reccomend the Tillyard essay to Candy mainly because of his assessment of Bertram's character, which made it make sense to me, but agree it's dated to some extent.

Yes, I've never read that. Will have to get hold of it.

Best wishes

Jessica

You just click on my ugly face (!) by my posts, and then click on "send message". Or send me an email. If you type "martin porter" into google you'll discover I'm reasonably respectable -- not some sicko internet stalker type ...

I will look around some second hand stores here for Tillyard as I have been making time to book shop this week. I still have a couple books I'm reading in my car trunk. Plus I have iBooks which I have read two books on, "A Tale of Two Cities" and "The Diamond Sutra".

I am going to see if I can start a post with P & T shortly....back on main page...