“I Don’t Get It…”

For my Themester activity I attended Adam Zuckers “Twelfth Night and the Broken Jest.” This talk was honestly right up my alley, Mr. Zucker discussed the idea of jest and even after scholars analyze and attempt to deduce certain jokes from the past, we still “don’t get it….” Most jokes I would like to think I understand, but there are those certain jokes that I hear and try to analyze for days and days, and I still don’t get it.

When I think of Shakespeare I can’t honestly say I think of jokes and laughter, sometimes I think of crying, but not from laughter. Mr. Zucker was especially amusing to listen to because he related to his topic, he told personal accounts of not understanding another persons jest. Honestly, after listening to Mr. Zucker I think I finally got it.

-Chelsea Mills

The Themester event I attended was the October 7th showing of Margin Call. The basic plot of the movie details a single day at an investment firm in New York as the employees of the firm decide to sell all their worthless assets and essentially crash the economy so that they don't lose their money. Overall I really enjoyed the movie and thought it was an extremely interesting and entertaining movie. I really can't compare this movie to anything we've read in class. Throughout the film, all of the characters are aware that the end decision is going to be to crash the economy so that they can keep their money, and some of them grapple with the moral issue of causing other people to lose money while they keep it, but there's never really any internal conflict. There's no sudden and dramatic realization of wrong doing like Lear has. All the employees just kind of pass the responsibility onto their bosses to let the boss make the decision, and each boss seems to have risen to their higher place by being more and more self serving. There's a definite analysis and observation into human nature that we see in Shakespeare, but Margin Call doesn't have that questioning tone towards the nastier portrayals of humanity. It's more like sadly accepting its portrayal and suggesting it won't change. This tone really gets driven home when at the end, the main boss of the investment firm gives a big speech and lists all the times that the world economies have crashed so that a select group of people will save money. He starts listing years in the 1600s and goes through maybe 20 times throughout the history of capitalism that crashes like the one in the movie have happened, and then says, "And there have always been and there always will be the same percentage of winners and losers. Happy foxes and sad sacks. Fat cats and starving dogs in this world. Yeah, there may be more of us today than there's ever been. But the percentages-they stay exactly the same." It kind of makes me happy I'm not a business major. 

Posted on behalf of Joseph Hegeman

Everyone is not what they seem

For my Themester blog, I chose to see the movie Catfish. Catfish is the true story of Nev Shulman, who started a relationship with a woman he believed to be a young, blonde artist, but who actually turned out to be a middle age woman. Relating this back to Shakespeare, Catfish definitely uses the theme of deception that Shakespeare was always incorporating into his plays. I’ve interpreted Shakespeare’s constant usage of lying and deception as more of a message that mankind as a whole fuels itself off of lying. Though Nev figured out that he was being catfished and the woman wasn’t the beautiful blonde he had grown to be fond of, he ended up creating a friendship with this woman. She ended up being a very kind person and a great friend to Nev. This also made me think of Shakespeare because, whether it was a comedy, tragedy, history, the antagonist or protagonist, deception didn’t discriminate. Shakespeare was proving that anyone is capable of deceiving you, no matter what kind of person they are. 

posted on behalf of Jacqueline Kiley

Deception and Misidentification in Cymbeline and Catfish

While watching Catfish, I couldn’t help but notice certain similarities between the movie and Shakespeare’s Cymbeline, most notably in their themes of deception. 

The movie is surrounded by this idea of deception, not just in its plot (a young man falling for a woman who is not who she says she is, online) but in the idea of the film itself –did the events recorded actually happen, did the filmmakers exploit not only their subject (Nev) but the woman and her family?  Throughout the entire film, we are left questioning what and who is real, and who is truthful.

This reminded me of Cymbeline both thematically and in plot structure.  Like we are left questioning which online figures are real or simply created personas in Catfish, in Cymbeline the characters are confused about the true identities of others.  We see this misidentification in Imogen (posing as a boy), Morgan/Belarius (posing as Guiderius and Arviragus’ father), and in Cloten (whom, in death, Imogen mistakes for her husband).  These misidentifications drive the plot and culminate in the end scene, where everyone is revealed as their true self and things are seemingly well.  Likewise, in Catfish, the filmmakers questioning of a family they know only through Facebook, leads to the culmination of the movie, where the family is seen as they truly are and the lies are exposed.

I think both the film and the play expose a common theme: the fear of being deceived and the power of deception.  The characters in both works are constantly speculating on if they are being deceived and in the end, these deceptions have enormous ramifications and lasting effects on the characters.

Catfish and All's Well That Ends Well: Similarities Between Modern and Shakespearean Deception

     I was actually looking forward to seeing Catfish because of it's popularity in modern day culture. As a fan of the MTV television series based off the documentary, I was curious to know the story of identity deception that started the whole phenomena. Even before watching the film, I knew I would find similarities between Catfish and one of Shakespeare's plays. Since Shakespeare used deception so often as a theme in his plays, it was only logical to assume that I would connect the documentary to a play I was familiar with.
     All's Well That Ends Well was the play that I immediately knew I could compare with Nev's story. In All's Well, Helena deceives Bertram in order to get the thing she wants most in the world: his love. She goes through with the bed-switching plot in hopes of becoming pregnant and therefore forcing Bertram to love her. This all seems like a perfect ploy for Helena; she gets to lose her virginity to the man she loves most and she also wins his heart in the process. Though it's not the way she would have originally wanted things to go, she seems to have no hesitations with fooling Bertram. She is obsessed with obtaining his affection that she convinced herself that an awful act of deception is the only way she can win him over and that no one would question her morals in doing so.
     Angela from Catfish reminded me of Helena because of the strength of her desire. She had affections for Nev, but knowing that she was unavailable to him in so many ways, decided to create a false front for him to meet. This identity she hid behind, Megan, got Nev's attention and started a bond between the two that would eventually last for almost a year. Angela was determined to win the affection of Nev in whatever way that she could, and so the idea of hiding behind a mask of a false person seemed like no problem to her. She didn't care about the eventual outcome of it all, she just cared that she got to interact and build a relationship with Nev. That is where she differed from Helena - when Helena seemed to have her future all figured out after she fooled Bertram, Angela only cared about the interactions of the time being and how she felt in that moment.
     These two women, though they thought they had good intentions, were blinded by the actual nature of their actions. The deception they caused in the name of love was justified in their eyes, but was hurtful in the eyes of their lovers. Helena and Angela both just wanted to be with the men they desired, no matter how they obtained their love. There are many similarities between modern day deception and Shakespeare's deception, showing that even over time and the countless changes to society, people are willing to use deception and lies to end up with their goal.

Fishing for an Audience: Not as New as We Think

I was fairly familiar with the central concept of Catfish the film as I have seen the TV quite a few times. Deception plays a fairly central role in the TV show; Nev and his friend approach almost every case with a very skeptical view of the supposed relationship. And almost every time I have seen the show, the investigation (I use the term loosely) reveals that the person is in love with a character created by the real person on the other side of the screen. Deception was not present at the outset of the movie, although it certainly becomes a central theme later on. The deception in Catfish seems very real and very tangible, with the supposed love interest becoming a potentially mentally unstable middle aged woman. In a case of art imitating life, Catfish received some criticism as to how real the documentary was. Many viewers of the film speculated, and offered ample evidence, that the documentary was staged. If true, Catfish can simply be viewed as a modern film adaptation of the deception common in Shakespeare’s stage plays. The buzz surrounding the deception of audience members and the subject of the film generated a larger audience for the film. Shakespeare knew audiences love to see conflict, and apparently so did Catfish's crew.

 Shakespeare uses deception in many ways through his plays. Helena’s deception of Bertram in All’s Well is Helena literally using her social network to create a relationship, just like Nev’s love interest. This discourse in Helena's relationship attracted viewers in the same way as Nev's personal "problem play". The concept of disguised or mistaken identity is also heavily used in Shakespeare’s works. Catfish presents the story of the problem that stems from social networking as a means of forming relationships, but Shakespeare seems to be an original producer of illusory lovers as entertainment. 

Themester Blog: Catfish, or Fishing for the Fool

“I don’t see how watching a movie about people catching catfish is going to be interesting…or related to Shakespeare,” remarked my roommate Megan as I prepared to head over to the Cinema. At that moment, I remember that I stopped in my tracks and couldn’t help but crack a small smile at the thought of actually donating two hours of my time to the pursuit of determining parallels between the Bard’s work and fishing.

After allowing a snort to escape, I turned back to her to say “I thought I already told you that it’s about internet phishing- you know, that whole thing that happened to Manti Te’o.”  She just shook her head in failed recognition and waved me off with the same assertion that she still didn’t see how I could connect such a topic back to Shakespeare.

Truth be told, for the first half hour or so of the movie, I couldn’t help but think that she may have been right. As I watched Nev Schulman begin a months-long romance with a beautiful online stranger only to find out that she was an unhappy, slightly insane middle-aged housewife, the only Shakespearean-related moment that kept popping into my head was the infamous Bed Trick that Diana and Helena orchestrate in All’s Well That Ends Well. At first, I chastised my memory, thinking, “Really, Ianna? This is the best you can come up with?” But the more I dwelt on it, the more I was able to see why the idea, silly as it initially was, wouldn’t leave me alone. We talked in class over the misogynistic implications of the scene: Bertram is so concerned with having sex that he literally doesn’t even realize that the person he thinks he’s sleeping with is someone else entirely. And while I'm not about to launch into a discussion on misogyny and internet phishing, the Bertram's obliviousness can't be ignored.

 In the film, Nev firmly asserts to his brother that Angela, the woman who catfished (is that even a verb?) him, “didn’t fool me. [She] just told me things and I never cared to question it.” This same viewpoint can be applied to Bertram’s situation with the Bed Trick. Helena came to his bed claiming she was Diana and Bertram seemed to have no qualms with that statement. Looking at this situation with Nev’s words in mind, Bertram is hardly the victim of these two women’s machinations, as he claims to be in Act 5 when the truth comes out.

And that’s what I think might be the biggest link between Catfish and All’s Well.  Nev was a victim of Angela’s devices despite his instances that he wasn’t fooled. It was heartbreaking to see him make the revelations he did and even more so when we find out that instead of anger towards Angela he demonstrates pity instead. Bertram, on the other hand is not a victim at all, and his sputtering around for excuses in order to preserve his dignity only serves to paint him as an even bigger fool than he already is.

Misidentified Monarchs

I’ve been noticing mistaken identities in Cymbeline and Henry IV Part I. Obviously we’ve already gone through the frankly astounding number of confused identities in Cymbeline: Innogen as unfaithful, Innogen as Fidele, Fidele as dead, Cloten as Posthumus, Posthumus as Italian…the list goes on. It’s hard not to notice the sheer frequency with which mistaken identities occur, and how absolutely ridiculous they are at times. Mistaken identities are a little more subtle in Henry IV. The most notable misidentification, I think, is King Henry’s (honestly, everyone’s) negative evaluation of Prince Hal. Aka Harry. Aka Henry V. He has many names.

The audience is aware that little Hal will one day grow up to be perhaps the greatest king of England. They know he is brave, compassionate, inspirational, clever and kind, and yet no one else can see this in Hal, least of all Hal himself. Prince Henry has no idea he is destined for greatness, or that he has the tools to achieve it. He only identifies himself as a fun loving drunkard, and a failure of a son. In a compelling soliloquy in Act I Scene II, lines 185-207 in the Arden edition, Hal vocalizes this, and vows to change. “I’ll so offend to make offence a skill, redeeming time when men think least I will,” (I.iii.206-207). Of course there are many ways this soliloquy can be interpreted, but the interpretation that seems most true to me is succinctly described in our notes by Johnson: “…a great mind offering excuses to itself,” (Kastan 162).

As Innogen is identified as false and unfaithful, as Cloten is identified as princely and good, as the Queen is identified as kind, Prince Hal is identified as good for nothing. I think the misidentification in both plays allows for greater character development, and a fuller arc of self-discovery; it’s much more satisfying to see Hal questioning who he is and how much he is worth, and eventually realizing his full potential than have him perfect from the beginning. It makes him human, and relatable. We all have questions about who we are, we all misidentify ourselves and others. It creates room for growth.

posted on behalf of Emily Sullivan

The Hunt for Hannibal

This is extremely belated, but I assure you, it will still be a good blog. The Hunt leaves an impression.

The Hunt is a Swedish film starring Mads Mikkelson, known in the U.S. for his chilling Hannibal the Cannibal on NBC’s Hannibal (also his chilling good looks according to my friend, Courtney). Mikkelson plays Luke, a kindergarten teacher, the only male teacher at his small school. Through no fault of his own, he is accused by Klara, the young daughter of Luke’s best friend, of sexually abusing her. This is, of course, a lie. Klara was angry at Luke, and wanted to get him in trouble. She had no understanding of the implications.

Eventually, the small Swedish town turns entirely against Luke. I will leave the gory details out, and avoid spoiling the movie for you.

The entire movie, I was eerily reminded of Arthur Miller’s The Crucible. A whole town, turning on one man based on the testimony of a single girl? A fever of paranoia sweeping a city? Sounds familiar. However, I wasn’t immediately drawn to any of Shakespeare’s work.

I saw similarities between Timon and The Hunt, in terms of betrayal, and the downfall of a man. Both Timon and Luke’s best friends betray them. They are both alone in a world against them. Driven by madness and grief, they both turn into misanthropes. The endings to both of their stories leave a sour taste in one’s mouth.

The theme of the sexual abuse of children, however, is absent from any of Shakespeare’s works. Was this because it was difficult to have children onstage at the time, because the topic was taboo, or was child abuse not acknowledged during the Bard’s lifetime? I’m unsure as to why.

The Hunt is an excellent, albeit painful, film, and I believe it may be nominated for an Academy Award soon. I highly recommend it. I would encourage you to bring tissues and a stress ball, for those high-tension moments.
posted on behalf of Emily Sullivan

Timon Zuckerberg

I like to consider myself a bit of a connoisseur of Oscar-nominated movies, so when I saw that the cinema was airing The Social Network and Margin Call, two movies I had not yet seen, I jumped on the opportunity. There’s really no need to say that both were fantastic, although I preferred The Social Network. What I really appreciated about the Themester showings at the theatre were the varied networks each movie illustrated; where in one movie you saw Mark Zuckerberg creating Facebook, easily the mightiest and most widely-used “social network” of modern times, in another you saw a group of financial geniuses deal with the biggest crisis their company faced in its history.

I won’t lie, I could probably make this post all about how beautifully filmed and how snappy the dialogue is in The Social Network (Aaron Sorkin is a screenwriting god) and not mention Shakespeare once, but there was a massive parallel that sticks out to be upon reading Timon of Athens. Jesse Eisenberg, beautifully portraying a college-age Mark Zuckerberg, unintentionally draws lines between himself and Timon that I can’t ignore upon having read the book and re-watching the movie. Although the account of the creation of Facebook isn’t entirely truthful, there must be some truth in the tagline “You don’t get to 500 million friends without making a few enemies.” Starting in the beginning of the movie, Mark progressively alienates himself from the very few friends he started with, including Eduardo Saverin, the co-creator of the website and Erica Albright, his (fictional) girlfriend turned ex.

It’s not hard to say that everything ended much better for Mark, no matter how fictionalized the movie may have been. Their ends were all a result of wastefulness though – Timon gave away his money wastefully, while Mark gave away his friendships wastefully. Timon was too blind for his own good, and Mark was too selfish for his own good.

Watch this movie though. So good.

posted on behalf of Skylar

The Hunt (For Social Progression)

For my Themester activity, I attended a mini-lecture and presentation of the 2012 Danish film, The Hunt. Though the film was almost entirely in Danish (with English subtitles), it was one of the most engaging movies I've seen in a while. 

The Hunt tells the tale of a warm and amicable small-town kindergarten worker, Lukas, who is unjustly and rashly accused of sexual assault when an upset young girl makes up a story after Lukas spurns her childish love fantasies towards him. As usual, the child is believed, and soon the entire close-knit community turns on him, metaphorically banishing him to the very outskirts of society.

            As part of the presentation, a Danish sociologist focusing on social networks gave both an introduction and a concluding discussion, in which he talked about the social phenomenon of conformity. Looking back on it now, I am immediately drawn to the parallels in conformity between The Hunt and many of Shakespeare’s works, especially Much Ado About Nothing, where again an entire group of people instantly believe a fabricated tale based off little to no evidence. While the subject of both stories are ultimately redeemed, they both have to endure great hardships, as they are based in cultures where one’s reputation is almost all they have.

            Although created more than 400 years apart, the depicted problems of conformity in these works did not change, and therefore their message is the same: conforming to major social beliefs can be hugely dangerous and often unjust.

Mendacity and Crap

       While I was not particularly fond of the play Cat on a Hot Tin Roof, I did enjoy the underlying themes, backstory and the overall connection to King Lear by William Shakespeare. The most profound connection that I saw between the two plays, was that of Big Daddy and King Lear. Both men seemed to have favorites when it came to their children, however they seemed to have the most trouble with the child that was their favorite. For King Lear his favorite daughter Cordelia gave him trouble as she would not profess her love to him before everyone to get her piece of his kingdom. This thoroughly upset Lear and he banished her and no longer called her his daughter. For Big Daddy his son Brick was clearly the favorite when it came down to it. However, Brick was an alcoholic and was thought to have had relations with another man. While the other children were discussed in both the plays, Gooper in COAHTR and Regan and Goneril in KL, the men seemed most distraught when it came to their other children Cordelia and Brick. 

      A huge theme in the play was mendacity which means untruthfulness. Big Daddy stressed the importance of being truthful to Brick and how everything revolves around it. This was ironic as his entire family was being untruthful to him about his health and Gooper through this all was trying to swoop in to gain control of the family business for when his father died. Also, this theme is shown in King Lear as Goneril and Regan lied to their father about how much they loved him just to get bits of his land and kingdom for themselves. The girls and Gooper had ulterior motives when it came down to it and were merely looking out for themselves.

      Although I did not particularly enjoy the play, I thought that it was cast very well and that the scene was wonderful. I also enjoyed seeing the many parallels between Cat on a Hot Tin Roof by Tennessee Williams and King Lear by William Shakespeare.

--posted on behalf of Avery Postema