Flutterings

For marymary, who was railing about The Taming of the Shrew a little over a year ago:

...the free will of a genuinely created character has a certain reality, which the writer will defy at his peril. It does sometimes happen that the plot requires from it characters certain behavior, which, when it comes to the point, no ingenuity on the author's part can force them into, except at the cost of destroying them. It may be that the Activity has chosen an unsuitable plot, or (this is perhaps more frequent) has imagined an unstable set of characters for working that particular plot out.

In such dilemmas, the simplest and worst thing the author can do is to behave like an autocratic deity and compel the characters to do his will whether or not. ... [W]restlings of natural truth abound in those romances where the heroine, after treating the hero for interminable chapters as though he were something the cat had brought in, is rescued by him under peculiarly humiliating circumstances and immediately falls into his arms in a passion of gratitude and affection. Knowledge of the very ephemeral nature of gratitude in proud and vain persons and of its irritating effect on the character, prompt the reader to wonder what the married life of the couple is likely to be, after thus starting from a false situation. It is a falsity of this kind that makes both actors and audience uncomfortable about The Taming of the Shrew; whether it is played as burlesque or softened into sentimental comedy, we are still left protesting that "'Tis a wonder, by your leave, she will be tamed so," and nothing will persuade us that characters like those would really subdue themselves to a plot like that.

- Dorothy L. Sayers, The Mind of the Maker (p. 69)

I didn't get there in time for the pre-show lion-dancing, but the Nashville Shakespeare Festival's production of Macbeth turned out to be quite good. In particular, both Macduff and Macbeth's reactions to the deaths of their wives were affecting, and the staging of the Weird Sisters was terrific -- they were in flowing backlit acid green robes (think fairytale white witches meet Morsmordre), billowing from a balcony, and they chanted rather than shrieked (something I've disliked in other productions). Also, this is the first production I've seen in which minor characters such as Ross and Lennox (sp?) came across with their own personalities -- dunno if earlier productions simply cut their scenes, if I was just more awake for this one, or if the directing brought it out. Now I want to reread the play. But not before bedtime...

"On Shakespeare's Sonnets, and Why Gay Marriage Is Good For Business."

April 23 is often celebrated as Shakespeare's birthday; this year, it will also mark the 390th anniversary of Shakespeare's death. There has been considerable controversy over the centuries regarding Shakespeare's sexual orientation; in this service, we'll look at why it matters, what will be at stake this November, and what Unitarian Universalists are doing to promote marriage equality.

I'll be a building a dossier from the usual raft of books and online resources, of course, but I also know that some of you are already exceptionally well-versed on these topics: if there are particularly references or links you're itching to recommend, please feel free to comment or to send me a holler. I'm particularly keen on addressing domestic partnership benefits from the employer/taxpayer angle -- e.g., data to convince corporate officers (and politicians they influence) that doing the right thing will help their bottom line...