Tag Archives: Shakespeare

Marginalia. no.315

Each toy seems prologue to some great amiss

~ Shakespeare, Hamlet IV,v

Christmas season can feel that way when you have more than half a dozen nieces and nephews to buy gifts for, not to mention children of your own, and your checking account plummets with the mercury.

Leave a comment

Filed under Marginalia

Marginalia, no.299

Now Jove, in his next commodity of hair, send thee a beard!

~ Shakespeare, Twelfth Night III,i

You wouldn’t think it to behold my rugged, bearded visage today, but once upon a time I presented to the world something less than a vision of omnipotent masculinity. Age sixteen, I recall, someone told me there was a loose thread dangling from the sleeve of my T-shirt. “Oh, sorry,” he corrected himself, “I guess that’s just your arm.”

Leave a comment

Filed under Marginalia

Marginalia, no.247

I little suspected that at that very moment my unlucky comrade was lying on a buffalo-robe at Fort Laramie, fevered with ivy poison, and solacing his woes with tobacco and Shakespeare.

~ Francis Parkman, The Oregon Trail

On an afternoon hike last month I went down a gully to inspect the rusted husk of an ancient Ford that had been dumped there God knows when. For my curiosity I got a bad case of poison oak. There’s only a relic itch now but at its worst my swollen, blistered forearm looked like a piece of meat that had been turned on a barbeque. Next time I’ll try Parkman’s prescription (it can’t be any less effective than calamine lotion). But what’s the proper dosage? An act of The Taming of the Shrew maybe? A choice scene from MacBeth? I was so desperate for relief three weeks ago I might even have re-read A Midsummer Night’s Dream.

Leave a comment

Filed under Marginalia

Marginalia, no.217

Now, by my sword, I will kill all his coats;
I’ll murder all his wardrobe, piece by piece

~ Shakespeare, Henry IV Part One

I always liked moving away, especially as a boy. I never regretted the chance to part forever from friends and acquaintances, to begin again in a new place as an unknown. I would put to quiet death all of my old garments – the selves I had worn and grown sick of seeing reflected in the eyes of others. Stripping them off, I never found myself naked. I was an infinite wardrobe. Now, if I could, I’d trade my sword for a needle. Stitch by stitch I would raise up all my dead.

1 Comment

Filed under Marginalia

Marginalia, no.119

Owe your banker £1,000 and you are at his mercy; owe him £1 million and the position is reversed.

~ John Maynard Keynes

Panurge in Rabelais’s third book insists that “nature has created man for no other purpose but to lend and borrow.”  Vision is borrowed from light, breath from air, the atomic materials of flesh and blood from ancient exploded stars.  Life is a usurious circle guaranteeing insolvency, after which our effects are taken up by others.  My mother warned me not to “borrow trouble” by worrying over things that were in God’s hands.  Maybe there’s as much trouble in insufficiently mortgaging oneself.  Keynes would rewrite Polonius’ advice to Laertes: “Neither a borrower nor a lender be – but if you borrow, owe big.”

3 Comments

Filed under Marginalia

Marginalia, no.102

The Turkish Emperour odious for other crueltie was herin a remarkable master of mercy; killing his favourite in his sleepe, and sending him from the shade into the house of darkness.  He that had been destroyed, would hardly have bled at the presence of his destroyer, where men are already dead by metaphor, and passe but from one sleepe unto another.

~ Sir Thomas Browne, from the Notebooks

“Dead by metaphor” is very nice.  Nice too is the whimsical spelling.  Why do we always correct Shakespeare and Milton but never Browne?  The folkloric notion that murdered corpses bleed in the presence of their murderer is echoed in Lady Anne’s words to Gloucester in Richard III: “See, see dead Henry’s wounds / Open their congealed mouths and bleed afresh / For ‘tis thy presence that exhales this blood / From cold and empty veins where no blood dwells.”  Criminal forensics must have been a simpler science when the killer could be identified by wheeling the victim round town for a game of Hotter/Colder.

2 Comments

Filed under Marginalia

The Librarian of Auschwitz

To read Aeschylus or Shakespeare…as if the authority of the texts in our own lives were immune from recent history is subtle but corrosive illiteracy.  …We know now that a man can read Goethe or Rilke in the evening, that he can play Bach and Schubert, and go to his day’s work at Auschwitz in the morning.  To say that he has read them without understanding or that his ear is gross, is cant.  In what way does this knowledge bear on literature and society, on the hope, grown almost axiomatic from the time of Plato to that of Matthew Arnold, that culture is a humanizing force, that the energies of spirit are transferrable to those of conduct?

~ George Steiner, Language and Silence

It may be impolite to say so, but it seems to me that intellectuals of the war generation frequently suffer from a too acute sense of historical exceptionalism.  Perhaps we find an example here.  Of course, in the mid-1960s -when Steiner wrote the above- the Second World War was a fresher scar than it is today, so some indulgences are granted.  But the idea seems to be that the events of the war, and the barbarity and suffering they entailed, were somehow qualitatively other (rather than quantitatively greater) than the human race had seen before.  According to this line of thought, the war brought to light facts of human depravity and moral fracture no prior generation had ever been forced to grapple with – such that all the past was forfeit and the religious, philosophical, and cultural wisdom of millennia was rendered irrelevant.

Should it be so surprising that a person can recite Goethe by heart or play a Bach prelude with a measure of skill and still be a monster?  It betrays an almost Victorian naiveté to think so.  A generation or two before Steiner, Paul Valery and Thomas Mann thought the First World War had stanched all such idealism – but the myth of the morally ennobling powers of western culture died a slow and sputtering death.  In fact, you can still hear it gurgling today, both among those on the right who continue to bluff faith in its innate superiority and those on the left who make it the West’s only evangelical task to lift the swarming masses of the third world up from poverty and ignorance into the liberating glory of consumerist post-modernity.

In J.G. Farrell’s Booker Prize winning The Siege of Krishnapur, the character of Mr Hopkins is disappointed by the failure of western culture to ennoble, as he saw it, the lives and minds of colonial India’s subject population.  “Culture is a sham” he finally concludes. “It’s a cosmetic painted on life by rich people to conceal its ugliness.”  We needn’t be so completely embittered as that.  But it’s certainly true that the noblest achievements of art and culture do not in themselves confer nobility on their appreciators or chart a progress up from barbarism to any summits of moral refinement.  Something more is required.  The products of a culture are not that culture itself, after all, but they are just that: its products.  They reflect the biases and obsessions and conflicting impulses of a particular people at a particular time, laboring under influences that are often obscure, as well as the constant, unfudge-able human nature that is the same everywhere and at all times.  They are not entirely without the ability to influence, but that ability is gravely limited even within the culture from which they are born, and they work no alchemy on the hard core of the heart.

Lest we fool ourselves, it’s precisely the fact that the same person can recite poetry in the evening and wake in the morning to return to work at Auschwitz that is at once our utter condemnation and our glory.  To hold these two possibilities in tension, albeit unconsciously, is to be human.  The truest and greatest products of art and culture, like the most profound insights of religion and philosophy, reflect that paradox.  This same vexed and violent, despairing wretch, Man, is also Shakespeare’s quintessence of dust godlike in apprehension, infinite in faculties and noble in reason – the most maddeningly contradictory of creatures.

Leave a comment

Filed under Misc.