Tag Archives: Shakespeare

No reMorse: putting Das Boot into Shakeapeare’s sonnets

shakespeare2

Mayday! Shakespeare emergency!

Because like the guy said: you never know when you’re going to be trapped in a submarine.

das-boot

112

Since I left you, mine eye is in my mind;
And that which governs me to go about
Doth part his function and is partly blind,
Seems seeing, but effectually is out;
For it no form delivers to the heart
Of bird, of flower, or shape which it doth latch:
Of his quick objects hath the mind no part,
Nor his own vision holds what it doth catch;
For if it see the rud’st or gentlest sight,
The most sweet favour or deformed’st creature,
The mountain or the sea, the day or night:
The crow, or dove, it shapes them to your feature.
Incapable of more, replete with you,
My most true mind thus maketh mine untrue.

Like it? Here are the rest.

1 Comment

Filed under bad eye patch, bagatelles, Shakespeare

poems for England and St George (in three places)

Three nights of poetry, nearly in a row. On Wednesday in Stratford I was one poem – my MOST Shakespearean poem – off a very Shakespearean set indeed in honour of the Bard’s birthday (the people at the Shakespeare Centre were planning the next day’s birthday cake), but I compensated for that by reading my fresh-from-the-oven poem about Nerval’s lobster, whose name was Thibault, and pronouncing it Tybalt throughout. The crowd loved it; there were audible giggles every time I said it. Very gratifying.

Wrote my poem for Thursday’s Counties event – a wonderful thing where 48 poets were commissioned each to write a poem about a ceremonial county of England, to be read over two nights – on the train back to London; and as my county was the City of London the Shakey spirit was upon us, and the result was a poem about Bill (or someone like him) looking across the river from the Globe Theatre towards St Paul’s then-medieval & derelict cathedral. I have to admit I am rather proud of this inordinate achievement. As the catchphrase goes in Shakespeare in Love: “it’s a miracle!”

Not content with being back home, I went up to Cambridge last night for the second evening of county poems. Lovely: back out into England. None of last night’s efforts were at all Bardic, that I can remember; sad. But it was a great evening and just about the best fun one can recall having. Lots of new friends! Hurrah! And missed the last train back to London. Quel surprise. Hurrah! Many many fine conversations – we all stayed up till 5am. Hurr – oh… And I’ve only just got in: delirious. And am about to go back out again. Must just take some Nurofen I think.

Well, and here is a thing that happened at the bar. It’s completely true, as far as the fact that I was upstairs at the time can make it.

Roddy Lumsden went down to get a drink. (Quel surprise!) He was with Simon Barraclough. As he stood there waiting at the bar, two guys down there were looking at the programme of poets and counties for the evening. Mocking. They’re going:

“Roddy Lumsden!”

“Oh yeah, I’m a big fan of him…” and

“Simon Barraclough!”

“Yeah, love him too...” like that.

Then as Roddy goes to depart, one of them says to him: “Don’t go up there. It’s poetry.”

“I know,” says Roddy. “I’m part of it.”

“Oh yeah, so who are you?”

“I’m Roddy Lumsden.”

4 Comments

Filed under England, parties, poetry, Shakespeare

a fate worse than death

edith-sitwell

Edith Sitwell, 1927, by Cecil Beaton

Oh, to be a poet, now that April’s here! I have been a-wandering in Merrie Stratford-Upon-Springtime,  just me, the locals, and five hundred million sixty-something tourists.I visited the churchyard of Holy Trinity Church, inside which the Bardic One is buried; but I resented getting 2/3 through the sanctuary and then being hit up for £1.50 to go into the chancel and see the tomb. I don’t know: it was like a peep show. And I’m not enough of a tourist to care. So I left.

I sat by the river Avon and watched the sixty-somethings disport themselves for a bit, then walked about taking pictures with my phone – as you do – then walked about the town for a long time till my feet started to hurt, and then realised THAT’S what’s been wrong with my right foot lately! (Even with Don Share worshipping it, which he has assured me on Facebook he does. You know, only the most profound declarations make it onto Facebook.) My shoes! Clearly what is needed is something with a bit of a heel, a bit of a platform, some arch support in the form of – well – being a bit, though not too, high – and maybe rope around the heels… but black or brown? Black, obviously, with the dress; but then, further, why is the only pair of such a shoe in this town priced at £159? (And don’t say it’s because they are ineffably lovely and handmade and Italian. We knew that.) (The real answer is that we are in Chocolate-Box-Upon-Avon.) (There’s nothing in H&M.)

I bought two books from the pleasingly named Chaucer’s Head bookshop, and the bookseller (who bought it as a running concern) agreed that he thinks the name of the shop is delightful. I’ll wear one on each foot.

A tiny roll and a half of Adnams in a pub, where I read parts of Shakespeare of London, by Marchette Chute – one of my new shoes – a delightfully readable account published in 1951. What a find! Reading about the building of London’s first four theatres – Burbage’s Theatre, the Curtain, the Rose, and the Swan – I  honestly got a bit choked up. I had to stop reading. It’s just as well, too, because I’m meant to be writing a poem about the City of London for my bit of the St George’s Day reading in Camden tomorrow night, and I’m trying to focus on a Shakespearean theme… I know! I know!! I do have an idea. It’s just doing it.

And first there’s this reading… (Well, first I’m going to have a shower. Right now I’m lying on my bed in the Hamlet Guest House eating treacle toffee out of a bag and typing this out.)

Now, Laura commented the other day, apropos my self-declared fatness and my understated black jersey frock, that “the great thing about being a poet is that you can wear what the hell you want, and people just put it down to artistic eccentricity, especially if you add in big dangly earrings and a couple of chunky, clinky bracelets.” This comment is to the fore today, really, especially what with my new book-shoes. (As it goes, I have a prejudice against huge dangly earrings. As to the bracelets, I already clank too much; I usually take some off before a reading so it won’t annoy the audience!) I really think there is no more tragic sight than some female poet taking the stage in frumpy clothing accentuated with enormous earrings; or looking too spangly because, hey, she’s a poet (and possibly a Wiccan as well); or wearing anything at all made of velvet, especially crushed velvet, or anything purple or self-consciously flowing; or trying to look like that but in chain-store clothing.

In short, I think we’ve lost the knack. I include myself in this. Is it because we all shop in chain stores? Is it because a well-cut suit is no longer the universal panacea? (I do favour little suit jackets, in fact, with jeans. I buy them in the old lady section of the department store.) Where is the woman in the clothing that swirls imperatively about her like a wave? Whatever happened to turbans, and brooches like tigers? The look so integrally strange that it is absolutely unassailable? Is it because we all have to hold down a steady job and fill in forms all the time now?

Edith Sitwell for example would never have worried. To have worn middle-of-the-road clothing with accents from Accessorise would have been for her a fate worse than death.

Anyway, I bought a book by her at the Chaucer’s Head this morning! Facade and other poems, 1920-1935. A delightful thing which will help me along my way very well, I think. Here is the passage which, opened to at random, made me buy it – the beginning of a poem called The Avenue:

In the huge and glassy room
Pantaloon, with his tail-feather
Spangled like ther weather,
Panached, too, with many a plume,
Watched the monkey Fanfreluche,
Shivering in his gilded ruche,
Fawn upon the piano keys,
Flatter till they answer back
Through the scale of centuries,
Difference between white and black.

The echo of Gérard de Nerval’s suicide note is chilling there, eh.

Now here’s a funny story, which Laura’s comment reminded me of. One day I was getting read to go out to a reading. My oldest kid, the one  I refer to as the Urban Warrior, who has an impeccable eye, was then around 13 or 14 I guess. On my way out we had this exchange:

Me: Okay honey,I’m going… how do I look?
UW: (Looking me up and down) Like a poet.
Me: Oh my God, really? (Frantically investigating all my garments) What, is it the shoes? Should I change my shoes?
UW: It won’t help.

And now into the shower – maybe more coffee – and thence to the Shakespeare’s Birthplace Shop, where I hope to buy an enormous ballpoint quill pen and possibly some more toffees (for the kids).

9 Comments

Filed under books, clothes, London, Shakespeare, Uncategorized, writing

how now, John Milton

“The name’s Milton. John Milton.”

It’s often said that writers live dull lives. We all know this isn’t necessarily the case for all writers, and Terry Eagleton has done a fine job today of giving our birthday boy, John Milton, the Man of Action treatment:

“Most poetry in the modern age has retreated to the private sphere, turning its back on the political realm. The two intersect only in such absurd anomalies as the poet laureateship. But whereas Andrew Motion does his bit to keep the monarchy in business, one of the greatest of English poets played his part in subverting it. John Milton, who was born in Cheapside 400 years ago today, published a political tract two weeks after the beheading of Charles I, arguing that all sovereignty lay with the people, who could depose and even execute a monarch if he betrayed their trust.

We are not used to such revolutionary sentiments in our poets…”

Read on here.

Meanwhile on the Books Blog, Michael Caines compares Milton to Shakespeare, and decides that while Shakes is possibly be more lovely and more temperate, Milt may well be the greater man:

“Milton the pamphleteer, the advocate of a free press, the republican, provides a canonical counterweight to Shakespeare, the spokesman for everything and nothing, whose personal views hide behind his dramatis personae. “Give me the liberty to know, to utter, and to argue freely according to conscience, above all liberties”, Milton argued in Areopagitica. “How now? A rat? Dead, for a ducat, dead!”, wrote Shakespeare in Hamlet, after crossing out ‘brown cow’. No wonder it was Milton whom Wordsworth felt “shouldst” be living in 1802, to see England turned into ‘a fen / Of stagnant waters’.

But then, as you’d know if you’d read On This Date in History, we have sometihng else for which to thank December 9th. It marks the anniversary of the publication, in 1854, of The Charge of the Light Brigade – a poem Tennyson conceived while mowing the lawn.

5 Comments

Filed under birthdays, john milton, poetry

milton visible

pl_first_page_detail

What’s in a name, indeed? If it didn’t matter, Shakespeare would never have invented so many new ords. And neither would John Milton – who beat him as English language’s number one wordmaker, with 620 neologisms to his credit.

Milton – born 400 years ago today at this very hour (6.30am, same as me) – knew that it is in language and its words that we learn to look, by naming what we see; to think, by working out what makes one thought different from another and marking it with a little placemarker; to reason, by marking how one idea or observation leads to or connects with another, and so on.

Milton, with Paradise Lost, changed your world whether you  know it or not. He changed your world even if you’re sitting enslaved in some dreary council office right now, no respite visible, drudging unaided in the near presence of some unprincipled, opiniastrous manager whose didactic complacency and impassive rebuff do daily damage to your self-esteem, even if your entire literary life is as the yawning void of anarchy, etc.

Got the picture yet?

Yes. Dreary, acclaim, rebuff, self-esteem, unaided, impassive, enslaved, jubilant, serried, solaced, satanic, saintly, liturgical, debauchery, besottedly, unhealthily, padlock, dismissive, respite, void, terrific, embellishing, unprincipled, presence, adventurer, dimensionless, fragrance, didactic,  love-lorn, self-esteem, complacency, anarchy, ethereal, sublime, feverish, flowery: all Milton’s.

John Crace tells us:

Milton’s coinages can be loosely divided into five categories. A new meaning for an existing word – he was the first to use space to mean “outer space”; a new form of an existing word, by making a noun from a verb or a verb from an adjective, such as stunning and literalism; negative forms, such as unprincipled, unaccountable and irresponsible – he was especially fond of these, with 135 entries beginning with un-; new compounds, such as arch-fiend and self-delusion; and completely new words, such as pandemonium and sensuous.”

John Leonard, in the introduction to his Penguin Classics edition of Paradise Lost, was at pains to illustrate the scholarly difficulties or verifying all this, and gives us the very useful and remarkable phrase: “words and senses ‘apparently original in some sense with Milton’,” the inner bit of which comes from an earlier scholar called William Hunter. Hunter, in a seminal essay which I of course know nothing about (sorry), says that over a thousand of these are attributed to Milton; and that the OED, cheeringly, got only 28 wrong.

But even so, Crace sadly concludes:

“Some of his words, such as intervolve (to wind within each other) and opiniastrous (opinionated), never quite made it into regular usage – which feels like our loss rather than his.”

4 Comments

Filed under birthdays, john milton, Living With Words