BS: Shakespeare plays in Elizabethan English

Subject: BS: Shakespeare plays in Elizabethan English
From: GUEST
Date: 18 Jul 05 - 02:21 PM

I'm a bit puzzled by an article in today's paper. The Globe Theatre have decided to do Shakespeare plays in the original Elizabethan English - so the actors are learning to speak with, and I quote, "accents that would have been heard on the Elizabethan stage - a mix of West Country, Scottish, Irish, American and Austalian". Did American and Australian accents exist in 1601?? I think not.. or did they already exist in the UK and were taken to the US and Australia? I always thought that American and Ozzie accents evolved in those countries so they could hardly have been spoken in Elizabethan England. My history's not too great so I don't know if Brits were coming and going between the US and UK in 1601 but I'm sure that Australia hadn't yet been settled - (or discovered?)- other than by the original inhabitants....

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare plays in Elizabethan English
From: GUEST,MMario
Date: 18 Jul 05 - 02:28 PM

I suspect they meant that the dialect used would be a mix of the current accents - since there are areas of the US that linguists BELIEVE use vowel sounds closer to Elizabethean English then not. Ditto Australia.

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare plays in Elizabethan English
From: Amos
Date: 18 Jul 05 - 02:29 PM

They weren't Australian accents at the time. They're saying that what Elizabethan actors osunded like would sound, today, like a mix of those things as they sound today. Like saying an ancient mastodon was like a mix of an elephant and a brontosaurus and a Yorkeshire terrier (because it was hairy).

Hope this helps! :D

A

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare plays in Elizabethan English
From: Le Scaramouche
Date: 18 Jul 05 - 03:50 PM

Pity they haven't used Cumbrian or Tyneside.

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare plays in Elizabethan English
From: Peace
Date: 18 Jul 05 - 04:04 PM

Middle English was a thing of the past when Shakespeare wrote. We know that some words were pronounced differently--check his sonnets. However, the language is still pretty much the same. The 'great vowel shift' was happening during the Bard's time--according to Jespersen (sp?), it occurred from the 14th to 18th centuries, and that affected the way the language was both spoken and heard. The 'great consonant shift' had already happened (8th-10th centuries) and coincided with the begining of the Middle English period and the end of the Old English period. I hazard that most people will encounter no more difficulty with 'Elizabethan English' as used by Shakespeare than they do with Shakespeare as we have heard him presented by actors with all kindsa accents. IMO.

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare plays in Elizabethan English
From: Shanghaiceltic
Date: 18 Jul 05 - 07:12 PM

As the Bard came from just outside Brum should the plays really be performed with a nice Brummy accent?

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare plays in Elizabethan English
From: Le Scaramouche
Date: 19 Jul 05 - 09:59 AM

Ah, but he was also very good at writing accents.

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare plays in Elizabethan English
From: Jeanie
Date: 19 Jul 05 - 10:08 AM

For anyone interested, a new book on this subject was published this April: "Pronouncing Shakespeare" by David Crystal (Cambridge University Press). It describes last year's experiment at Shakespeare's Globe in which for 3 days in June their "original practices" production of "Romeo & Juliet" also included using the original pronunciation - which they are repeating this year with another play.

As regards the Brummy or Midlands accent, I seem to remember reading that there are several slang expressions used in Shakespeare which still occur in Midlands dialects to this day. I was in a production of "The Merchant of Venice" with a Brummie who told me that Gobbo (as in the name of the character Launcelot Gobbo) is still a popular nickname in the Midlands, and if you were coming out of a football match in the Birmingham area and called out "Eh, Gobbo !" several heads would turn to look to see if you were calling them.

- jeanie

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare plays in Elizabethan English
From: Lighter
Date: 19 Jul 05 - 10:40 AM

My prediction: if Shakespeare shows up, it'll sound to him just like what it is - a troupe of moderns trying to imitate an accent they've never heard in use and thus not doing a very good job of it. Of course, nobody else will notice, because they've never heard 17th Century London English either !

But seriously. Many, maybe most, features of Shakespearean English can be "reconstructed," though little of the reconstructing can be checked independently against anything - we have no tapes. (We do know, though, that "reason" and "raisin" sounded virtually identical because Shakespeare punned on them at length. And "I" seems to have retained of its Middle English "ee" sound. Upshot: Shakespeare would probably sound rather "Irish" to us today.)   

"Shakespearean pronunciation" is a fun gimmick, but most people find the vocabulary of bald Billy's speeches hard enough to follow without having to adjust to an unfamiliar accent.

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare plays in Elizabethan English
From: R. Padgett
Date: 19 Jul 05 - 11:04 AM

Was listening to the radio this am and the point made was that much of the comedy and rhyme used by Shakespeare in his writings no longer works due to the change of pronounciation

In fact turns out as gobbledegook

A change to the original more akin to Brum and West Country should restore some of the rhymes etc and perhaps unearth the comedy etc

Good luck to them all

My native Barnsley accent is available to anyone who wishes broad Yorkshire authenticity!!

Ray

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare plays in Elizabethan English
From: Pied Piper
Date: 19 Jul 05 - 11:13 AM

"To-morrow, and to-morrow, and to-morrow,
Creeps in this petty pace from day to day,
To the last syllable of recorded time;
And all our yesterdays have lighted fools
The way to dusty death. Out, out, brief candle!
Life's but a walking shadow; a poor player,
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage,
And then is heard no more: it is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing."

Still mustn't grumble.

PP

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare plays in Elizabethan English
From: M.Ted
Date: 19 Jul 05 - 11:37 AM

This really brings out the fact that, though understanding "Shakespeare" seems a rather literate and esoteric enterprise today, it was popular entertainement in it's time, which meant that every speech, every joke, and every line had proved itself, time and again, before an audience--

If Hamlet were properly understood, most American schools would not allow it to be taught, let alone performed--

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare plays in Elizabethan English
From: Le Scaramouche
Date: 19 Jul 05 - 05:50 PM

Shakespeare works best through motion. On the page it's not so hot, but acted with conviction and passion....

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare plays in Elizabethan English
From: Bill Hahn//\\
Date: 19 Jul 05 - 06:23 PM

There was just a piece on the radio here---NPR---about this subject and it was quite interesting. I guess if you go to www.npr.org and look for All Things Considered you can find it.

Interestingly, there is a place here in the U S---Smith's Island where the native people speak in Elizabethian dialect still.   It is off the coast of Maryland in the Chesapeake Bay area. Written up in National Geographic many years ago.   I went there a while back by the only transport to it (other than private boat)the daily mailboat.
Inteesting place that is peopled by fishermen and crabbers and has only one small boarding house---then anyway.

Bill Hahn

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare plays in Elizabethan English
From: Peace
Date: 19 Jul 05 - 10:35 PM

It is in "Hamlet" that Shakespeare has the Prince say--while his head is resting on Ophelia's lap: "Oh, you with your c's, u's an' t's". That line is removed from high school editions of the play.

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare plays in Elizabethan English
From: bobad
Date: 19 Jul 05 - 10:39 PM

cuts ??

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare plays in Elizabethan English
From: GUEST,Desdemona
Date: 19 Jul 05 - 10:59 PM

I've read Crystal's book, and was sorry to have missed "R & J" at the Globe last year, as I'm extremely keen to see one of these productions. And as Dame Fortune--the strumpet--would have it, the matinee of "The Winter's Tale" I was planning to attend on July 7 were cancelled (another story; but as bloody close to anything like that as I ever want to be, 'nuff said). Better luck next time, eh?

Anyway, M. Ted makes the important point above that Shakespeare was a working play*wright*, ie, one who "makes" plays as a livelihood. His job was to produce popular entertainment that would fill the playhouse, "put bums in seats", and please an audience ranging from the penny stinkards in the yard to the aristocrats in the Lords' seats, above and behind the players...affording a relatively poor view of the play, but giving the less fortunate an excellent view of THEM!

The fact that this highly successful commercial playwright also managed to produce what is arguably the most important body of work in the English canon is a testament to an extraordinary genius with an almost unimaginably broad appeal. I would argue (and often have done!) that old WS managed to say just about everything that needs saying about the human condition, and so definitively that many don't realise how often they quote him as an ordinary part of vernacular speech.

I do feel that the misrepresentation/interpretation of Shakespeare as somehow esoteric, highbrow and beyond the intellectual reach of any but some rarefied cognoscenti has done a terrible disservice to potential readers and audiences who, were they to put aside preconceived notions and simply read the text aloud, would find that he was, in fact writing in (early) modern English, and is agood deal more accessible to Joe--or Josephine--Average than, say, William Faulkner!

'O, for a muse of fire, that would ascend the brightest heaven of invention...!

~D

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare plays in Elizabethan English
From: M.Ted
Date: 22 Jul 05 - 12:48 PM

Shakespeare if not the most elusive of all literary greats, or perhaps a close second to Homer. Most of what has been written about him is educated speculation. If it wasn't for the body of work attributed to him, there would be very little evidence that he even existed.

It has been pointed out that Shakespeare's lexicon extended to some 35,000 words (some of which appeared for the first time in his work)--Bacon, who is regarded by many as the greatest intellect of his time, by contrast, used less than 10,000 words. And he seemed to have knowledge of great depth about more things than one man could.

If you think of his work as literature, all this is greatly mysterious, but it is more understandable when you remember that it was theatre.

Then, as now, theatrical productions are collaborative efforts--a lot of the speeches were recitations that were associated with particular actors--many of the comic scenes (like the recurring dialogues between a fool and a gentleman) were much like the comic sketches we know from Abbott and Costello and the Marx Brothers,and were interpolated in to different plays--

Many of the stories were familiar, and likely had been enacted in different ways which were transmitted orally amongst acting companies in other forms before they were crafted by Shakespeare--

And, of necessity, a certain amount must have been born on the stage, in reponse to audiences that were much more interactive, and more demanding than today--

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare plays in Elizabethan English
From: Amos
Date: 22 Jul 05 - 12:55 PM

I don't think of his language as gobbledygook at all, and I find the idea startling. He does require a vocabulary greater than Bart Simpson's, but I find his language delightfully clear and entertaining.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare plays in Elizabethan English
From: MMario
Date: 22 Jul 05 - 12:56 PM

I've always said that if Shakespeare were alive today he'd be writing for soap opera's.

we did a little research when reading shakespeare in HS and managed to thorough embarass our teacher -

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare plays in Elizabethan English
From: Jim McLean
Date: 22 Jul 05 - 01:45 PM

Over 30 years ago I shocked and English teacher by suggesting that if Shakespeare was played with a Dublin accent, then some of the words would make more 'musical' sense rather than hear them mangled by Gielgud or Olivier.

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare plays in Elizabethan English
From: Amos
Date: 23 Jul 05 - 11:29 AM

Oh, you are a heretic, aren't you, Jim!! :D

A

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare plays in Elizabethan English
From: Lonesome EJ
Date: 23 Jul 05 - 12:31 PM

I heard the PBS bit about this, and one of the actors was doing snatches of Shakespeare in the supposed Elizabethan accent. He gave it a sort of nasal pirate sound, resembling Long John Silver's pirate drawl. It was strange, but what I liked was the fact that it sounded less stilted and posh than the accent generally used by actors delivering Shakespeare. That, at least, reflects the common (pun intended) ancestry of Shakespeare and many members of his audience.

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare plays in Elizabethan English
From: Lighter
Date: 23 Jul 05 - 09:53 PM

Kenneth Branagh's "Hamlet" is one of the greatest Sheakespearean films ever. We watched it on the big screen with two good friends, one an artist, the other an attorney.   Neither had majored in literature, taught high school or college, or taken part in any of the specialized activities that so many Shakespeare-lovers seem to take for granted.

Neither one of these highly intelligent people was able to sit through the film with us. Each had bailed out, separately, by the time the movie was half over.

This was just the most glaring example in my experience of smart, educated people being unable to understand enough of Elizabethan dialogue to understand fully what's going on. And I suspect that many of Shakespeare's original audience had a hard time following his language too. First of all, much of it was poetic and artificial even in 1600. And second, what do you make of a writer with a 35,000 word vocabulary when your own is about 8,000? One reason Shakespeare's works were so successful commercially is that seeing a play was an important diversion - and the Globe did not have many competitors on a given afternoon. We know that those audiences were rowdy too: in other words, only the most artistic and intellectual were giving their undivided attention to the majesty of the speeches.


Oh yeah: I didn't say Shakespeare's language was "gobbledygook," just that without footnotes it's very hard to follow 400 years later.
Ask anyone with a degree in something other than English.

I dare ya.

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare plays in Elizabethan English
From: GUEST,leeneia
Date: 24 Jul 05 - 12:22 AM

It's important to distinguish between understanding the meaning and understanding the speech. I hate it when Shakespearean actors assume a thick, supposedly-cultivated RP accent which obscures the words.

We can't get the meaning of the words when we can't make out what the words are.

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare plays in Elizabethan English
From: alanabit
Date: 24 Jul 05 - 05:37 AM

You can get more from Shakespeare by studying the text and increasing your knowledge of the background and history etc. However, it is not necessary to understand every word   - indeed, I willingly concede that most people would be unlikely to. It is the subtext which is more important. In a good production, that is made much more clear than the actual words by the acting. If you simply watch what the characters actually do, rather than than try to unravel every word they are saying, you form a much clearer picture of what is going on. Schoolchildren are usually quite capable of comprehending Shakepeare when they see it.
I must add that I enjoyed Desdemona's comments a lot.

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare plays in Elizabethan English
From: jacqui.c
Date: 24 Jul 05 - 08:03 AM

From experience I know that I, for one, have to concentrate harder when watching a Shakespeare play in order to get more of the import. However, I think that it's worth it - he was one hell of a student of human nature.

I haven't heard anything about this latest idea - I wonder if it will make the plays a little more difficult to understand. Time will tell....

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare plays in Elizabethan English
From: Jeanie
Date: 24 Jul 05 - 08:39 AM

I agree, Alan. In preparing their parts, the *actors* need to understand every word they are saying, but the audience really doesn't need to. It is the characters and situations which "make" the stories and it is these, when prepared well by the actors privately and in rehearsal, which will draw the audience in. The actor has to "eat" the words, so that they become a part of him and he becomes the person who is speaking them.This is true of any play, old or modern. I've been lucky enough to have performed in several Shakespeare plays, and prepared and performed speeches from many others, and one thing I (and other people) have found that seems to be unique to Shakespeare is that his choice of words, rhythm and pattern actually *tell* you how to speak the words, and that as you speak the words, the feeling that the character is having becomes very real to you, helping you to "become" them. It becomes a kind of "virtuous circle": Speak the words - feel the feeling - speak the words ......

I think things have been changing for some time in the way Shakespeare is approached and acted. You will find far less "Received Pronunciation" and heightened, stylized portrayal now, and far more of a natural, "real" style. A fascinating place to go is the exhibition at Shakespeare's Globe in London, where you can hear parallel recordings of well-known speeches by well-known actors, dating from the earliest wax cylinder recordings to the present day.

The way Shakespeare has been approached in schools has had a lot to answer for - and is, I'm sure, the reason why so many people in adult life fight shy of him. It will take some years to filter through, but increasingly the very youngest generation of schoolchildren are now being introduced to the characters, situations and (at least some of) the language of Shakespeare before they are 11. I've just directed 30 eleven-year-olds in a "Shakespeare4Kidz" production of "A Midsummer Night's Dream" and it has been such a delight to see them entering into the characters, situations and words totally fearlessly and with infectious gusto. I really hope that the fun and fearlessness they have had in their first experience of Shakespeare will continue.

Here's a quote of a conversation amongst a group of 11-year-olds that is cited by their teacher in the book: "Shakespeare for All in Primary Schools":

Ashley: Schools should let you act them, though. You learn more.
Charlotte: Did you like the words ? I love the words.
Lewis: Yes, the words are alright, but you've got to say them.
Sheana: Acting's the best, and words are second.
Craig: No, Shakespeare;s words are for saying and acting. That's why he wrote them.

Brilliant stuff !

- jeanie

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare plays in Elizabethan English
From: Lonesome EJ
Date: 24 Jul 05 - 12:35 PM

I, for one, don't go to a Shakespeare play with the same sensibility that I would give to a play by, say, Tennessee Williams or Eugene Oneill. To me, Shakespeare's plays take on the aspect of ritual. I believe that Shakespeare plays a role in our society today akin to that of the morality plays of the medieval period. Each character is a kind of archetype, having meaning not just within the play's context, but in the broader human drama. The plots vibrate with a significance beyond the production. Attending a recent production of The Tempest, I was again struck by the ritualistic, nearly religious, aspect that Shakespeare has taken on. One even might say that the archaic and arcane segments of language merely enhance the effect, like the latinate prayers of a priest.

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare plays in Elizabethan English
From: Lighter
Date: 24 Jul 05 - 09:58 PM

I agree with Lonesome EJ. With so much else falling apart, Shakespeare remains one of the few bedrock elements of our culture. Everybody knows who he was, what he did, and how well he did it - even if they're not sure of the details.

If Shakespeare were to go, I'm afraid the next rung down would be Walt Disney.

If you know what I'm saying.

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare plays in Elizabethan English
From: GUEST,Shanghaiceltic
Date: 25 Jul 05 - 01:05 AM

I have seen a number of live performances of Shakespeare as well as film adaptations ( the latest being the Merchant Of Venice with Al Pacino as a very good Shylock) and I enjoy them. I try to read the plays too but I find that harder.

For me Dickens, Austin and the Bronte's are the same. I can enjoy a good fim adaptation but I find them hard to read, nonetheless I am trying.

A post above mentioned the way that Shakespeare was taught in school. We did MacBeth and analysed it to death. Surely the plays were written as entertainment and primarily should be seen as such. Given the sort of crowds that would have filled the Globe in his day I do not think that they would have done much analysis apart from throwing rotten veges at poor actors.

BTW we also did Chaucer's Cantabury Tales in the original old English and that certainly had us reaching for the dictionaries.

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare plays in Elizabethan English
From: jacqui.c
Date: 25 Jul 05 - 07:42 AM

That's the great thing about the Shakespeare plays - they can be enjoyed on a lot of levels.

I found that the analysis that took place as part of my exam curriculum really took the layers off and started me thinking a lot more about the motivation of the characters. When you're having to write an essay about love as portrayed in Much Ado About Nothing you come to realise what a complicated story he wrote and just how different the characters are from each other.

Now, watching any of the plays always leaves me thinking about the underlying issues involved.

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare plays in Elizabethan English
From: Coyote Breath
Date: 25 Jul 05 - 02:36 PM

I am blessed.

I have a "Complete Works of William Shakespeare" (and it IS complete) with absolutely NO footnotes. True. and it is illustrated by Eric Fraser. Yup!

It is titled "The Tudor Edition of William Shakespeare - The Complete Works". Edited, with an introduction and glossary, by Peter Alexander Regius Professor of English Language and Literature, University of Glasgow.

Published by Collins - London and Glasgow in 1951.

It is one of my dearest "companions". I have read it cover to cover two or three times. Born and raised in Wisconsin, with a master's degree in Fine Art, I have never had a hard time understanding "the bard's" words.

I paid $3 for it and bought it in 1954 at a bookstore in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. It was recommended to me by the store's proprietor, Fred Basset Blair, former Secretary of the Wisconsin Communist Party and acknowledged local authority of Shakespearean literature.

I'd love to hear it done in Elizabethan English.

Does anyone think that might be recorded somehow?

CB

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare plays in Elizabethan English
From: MMario
Date: 25 Jul 05 - 02:51 PM

lighter - I have to disagree - the footnotes and sheer intellectual CRAP that the educational system have surrounded his plays with are what make shakespeare unpalateable to many. When you stop trying to analyze the plays and just enjoy them as the bawdy entertainment they are - they become much easier to follow, much easier to enjy and much much more understandable to the "average" person.

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare plays in Elizabethan English
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 25 Jul 05 - 04:10 PM

If it wasn't for the body of work attributed to him, there would be very little evidence that he even existed.

M.Ted, there are several books around that pull together the substantial evidence of Shakespeare's existence, to save you having to do do the legwork for yourself. Try, for instance, "The Genius of Shakespeare" by Jonathan Bate. I think you will be surprised.

Lonesome, I've seen about 12 professional Shakespeare productions in the past three or four years, and I don't think a single one of them was in what could be described as posh voices. Here in the UK at least, there has been a sea-change away from the Olivier era, led by companies such as the Northern Broadsides. The Broadsides deliver Shakespeare vigorously in rich and authentically Yorkshire voices.

Lighter enthuses about Branagh's Hamlet, but I'd go for Baz Luhrman's Romeo & Juliet, which really pushed the boundaries with stunning effect. As for the rest of that post from Lighter - I couldn't disagree more.

My daughter Sorcha (White tiger at Mudcat) switched on to Shakespeare when she was 10, from watching "Shakespeare in Love." That was followed up with "Romeo & Juliet" at Regent's Park open-air theatre in London, and a further six plays, including four productions by the RSC. She is glued to the performances and understands them as easily as she understands Harry Potter.

For Much Ado at the Globe last year she elected to be a "groundling" and leaned on the stage apron in pouring rain all night. A chap in the covered seating kept popping down into the arena (audience perambulation is encouraged at the Globe) to ask Sorcha who was who on stage - eventually making the spendid suggestion that the characters should sport their names like footballers.

Peace, that line about Cs and Us and Ts may not appear in high-school editions, whatever they are (in the UK, standard texts are used for the national curriculum) but neither does it appear in the Quarto or First Folio. Hamlet does however refer to "country matters" in the scene you were describing. I'd be astonished if that was considered too strong for US kids, though the allusion is obviously bawdy.

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare plays in Elizabethan English
From: M.Ted
Date: 25 Jul 05 - 06:22 PM

I won't be surprised by Bates book, because I never had a question about Shakespeare til recently, when someone dragged out the old Bacon theories, and I started looking for evidence to show how idiotic the idea that someone else wrote Shakespeare was--I was surprised at how little evidence of the Great Man there really was--no portraits, no letters, no manuscripts, a lot of speculation as to his life, but no real chronology-- it tends to be "Most likely", or "in all probability"--I discreetly stopped championing the mythical Shakespeare, and have tended to be more interested in exploring the rather remarkable pieces that somehow or other all got tied together into the body of "Shakespearean Plays"--

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare plays in Elizabethan English
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 25 Jul 05 - 08:15 PM

M.Ted, you said there was little evidence that Shakespeare existed. (The works attributed to him provide no evidence on this point.) Heme my suggestion that you read one or two relevant books. OK you might not be surprised, but you would reach a different view, assuming your mind is not closed.

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare plays in Elizabethan English
From: beardedbruce
Date: 25 Jul 05 - 08:53 PM

GUEST,Shanghaiceltic,

Chaucer's Canterbury tales were in Middle English (14th century). MUCH easier than Old English (pre-1100) (Beowulf, etc) to those of use speaking Modern English ( which technically includes Shakespeare).

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare plays in Elizabethan English
From: M.Ted
Date: 26 Jul 05 - 12:47 AM

PeterK-I don't really doubt that Shakespeare existed, my point is that, compared to other literary greats, there is very little documentation of his life--also, unlike nearly every other writer, there nothing clearly autobiographical in his works--no dates of completion--OK--I said that all already--but there are certainly more questions than answers, which is a completely agreeble situation. because it creates all kinds of room for inquiry, discussion, and opportunities to rethink--

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare plays in Elizabethan English
From: A Wandering Minstrel
Date: 26 Jul 05 - 08:18 AM

Erm

the reason why the "C's U's and T's" line is missing from Hamlet is that it's actually a line from Twelfth Night!

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare plays in Elizabethan English
From: Paul Burke
Date: 26 Jul 05 - 10:09 AM

Shakespeare came from Stratford- Archers country. Macbeth should sound like Eddie, and Lady M like Clarrie. Linda Snell should be one of the witches, and Joe Grundy and Bert Fry as Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, oops wrong play.

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare plays in Elizabethan English
From: Le Scaramouche
Date: 26 Jul 05 - 10:30 AM

NO. Shakespeare was good at writing regional dialects for his characters. They shoudln't all sound like they're from the same place.

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare plays in Elizabethan English
From: M.Ted
Date: 26 Jul 05 - 12:31 PM

Good point LS--Shakespearean characters each have very distinct ways of speaking---and not just regional dialects--different tradespeople, different classes, speak in their own different ways with their appropriate lexicons--

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare plays in Elizabethan English
From: GUEST,Susan
Date: 01 Nov 06 - 02:21 PM

I perform at an Elizabethan themed venue. The way I way taught, (by Ms Julie St.Germaine, among others) is that Elizabethans spoke in a manner very similar to what we think of a "Pirate" an "Hillbilly"

The actor (can't remember his name just now) who played Long John Silver in the 1930's Hollywood movie "Treasure Island" used the dialect from his tiny secluded hometown in England. Because the town was not a major trade center and the residents kept to themselves, the accent had not changed much since Elizabethan times. "Aye, be truth I tell ye"

Similarly, the Appalachian Mountains (in the US) were so secluded until the 1930's that the residents (who used to be called hillbillies) maintained the accent and manner of speach of the origional settlers from the 1600's.
"Whar be Jeramiah?" "He be o'er thar"

Austrailia was settled in the 1800's so the language is most similar to that time period.

HOW can we be sure how the accents sounded? Because there were no rules of grammer (or spelling) people wrote the way the words sounded to them. Try reading Shakespere like a pirate or hillbilly would. It works!! Rhymes that sounded contrived or "pushed" actually rhyme!

Read Elizabeth I's own writings (if you can)... she talked like a pirate!! Ain't that a kick?

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare plays in Elizabethan English
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 01 Nov 06 - 02:42 PM

Bloody silly idea ....soon there would be as few people listening to Shakespeare as listen to English folksongs. How many people must have turned up to an English folk club and thought, I'm buggered if I'm going to listen to anybody sounding like that.

Compare and contrast the state of English folk music to English theatre.

Shakespeare pulls an audience for an entire week everywhere, whoever is playing it. There are about four folk artists who could fill a decent sized theatre once every six months. And one of those(McTell) doesn't sing in the regulation Water Gabriel/Robert Newton's Long John Siver accent.

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare plays in Elizabethan English
From: GUEST,memyself
Date: 01 Nov 06 - 03:18 PM

Must be quite a bunch of snobs over there, if they'd rather give up Shakespeare altogether than hear him performed in disreputable accents.

Okay, all you folksingers, it's back to school - we must work on our elocution, mustn't we?

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare plays in Elizabethan English
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 01 Nov 06 - 03:39 PM

Ulster Scots came into the Appalachian valleys in the early 18th c, not the 17th c., and gradually displaced the Cherokees and other native tribes who lived there.

Trying to relate the speech of these settlers of Scottish (and mixed)ancestry, who came to the Appalachians in the 1700's to Elizabethan English, is nonsense.

Aaarrrgh!

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare plays in Elizabethan English
From: Lighter
Date: 02 Nov 06 - 09:45 AM

And despite the popular mythology, promoted about a century ago by Romantic researchers claiming Ulster ancestors, the white settlers of the Appalachians were not solely, or even chiefly, Ulster Scots (or "Scotch-Irish" as they're usually called).

Ulster Scots were the largest minority among the settlers. English immigrants were a close second, with immigrants from Scotland, southern Ireland, France, and Germany following in order of numbers.

A good rough estimate is that about 40% of the Appalachian settlers were from Ulster, 35% from England, and the remainder from elsewhere.

The Georgia mountains weren't settled until the early 19th century.

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare plays in Elizabethan English
From: lady penelope
Date: 02 Nov 06 - 01:45 PM

I'm with MMario on this one. If the actors actually understand what their characters are saying, there really shouldn't be a problem what accent they use. And I think we can get more than a little caught up in over analysing Shakespeare's work. What he produced first and foremost was entertainment.

The vocabulary is slightly different from what we're used to today and the emphasis on word play may be strange to some, but the main barrier is having to listen to people who merely recite the words verbatim, with no real understanding of what it is they are saying. Many people don't even expect to understand what's being said!

For example, during a summer school trip to see a brilliant production of Much Ado About Nothing at the Barbican with Sinead Cusack and Derek Jacoby in the lead roles, I was sushed and finally threatened with being reported to the manager if I insisted on continuing to laugh (at the funny bits). Had I no respect for the work of Shakespeare? I was agog. I couldn't help myself and just had to ask the couple if they realised the play was a comedy? The look on their faces said it all and they stormed off to complain to someone.

But it's this almost deification of a bloke what wrote plays that puts most people off. It's seen as a chore before the first line is read, the first sentence uttered.

Also, it is almost seen as sacrilage NOT to like him. He's a writer, like any other writer. Why does everyone HAVE to like him? It's like cheesecake. I hate cheesecake. It doesn't matter what flavour it is, I just don't like it. But every time I'm offered cheesecake and I politely refuse, all I get is "Oh, but you'll like this one because....insert reason of your choice here...". It's the same with Shakespeare. Now I like Shakespeare, a lot. But if you don't, I can see that other people enthusing about him to you is going to make it worse, not better.

Oh, whilst the debate over accents rages on, consider that many of Shakespeare's plays are not set in England. Would the audience then, have expected actors to speak in Italian, Danish or Scottish accents etc. depending on where the play was set?

Subject: RE: BS: Shakespeare plays in Elizabethan English
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 02 Nov 06 - 02:13 PM

I find it pretty hard to understand the dialogue in a lot of American films, but it doesn't mean I can't more or less follow what is going on.