When I was studying Macbeth, I have a study guide which has the original text on one page, while a more ‘updated, modern’ translation on the other. It is very helpful in helping to understand what’s going on. Also, the ‘updated translation’ explains the rather cryptic stage directions (such as changing “aside” to “speaking to himself”) and also includes stage directions missing from the original text (for example, the text added a small note that sound of women crying could be heard when Lady Macbeth jumped off the wall).
In my senior year of high school, one of my classmates translated a huge chunk of King Lear into the hip-hop vernacular contemporary of the time (mid-1980s). At the time, I thought it was mind-blowingly clever.
No. That one has no relation to Shakespeare whatever. Doesn’t even have feuding families or mutual suicides.
Yes, yes. That’s what I’m looking for. I don’t suppose you’d be able to tell me enough to locate them (titles, names actors or year of issue)?
But I think you may have been fooled by the same promotional catch phrases as jrfranch. Great for selling tickets, but the movies are not about the same things at all. Something billed as “a modern Hamlet” deals with mobs and hit men, etc.
Umm… already done for about twelve and a half seasons 
And yes, not sure if anyone else does, but I often watch a simpsons episode with the capsule right in front of me, trying to keep up with the 'did you notice’s, the cultural references, and the discussion topics. Really does make it more fun, especially if you’ve already seen the episode a few times.
We now return you to your regularly scheduled shakespeare discussion thread.
:dubious:
Am I being whooshed?
Added stage directions! ADDED STAGE DIRECTIONS! The horror! The horror! [I can supply a subtitle for this literary allusion].
Seriously…If Shakespeare had really, seriously, and necessarily demanded that there is a woman crying in the background when Lady MacBeth dies, he would have written so. That stage direction is not missing anymore than this is:
DUNCAN: There’s no art
To find the mind’s construction in the face:
He was a gentleman on whom I built
An absolute trust.
ENTER MACBETH [TO THE SOUND OF CANNED LAUGHTER and WHOOING a la Married with Children]
Oh, I forgot to mention in my earlier post: Shakespreare IS translated into modern English.
The folio (original version) of The Merchant of Venice (Act I, Scene 3, lines 101-108) looks like this:
Shy. Signior Anthonio, many a time and oft
In the Ryalto you haue rated me
About my monies and my vsances:
Still haue I borne it with a patient shrug,
(For suffrance is the badge of all our Tribe.)
You call me misbeleeuer, cut-throate dog,
And spet vpon my Iewish gaberdine,
And all for vse of that which is mine owne.
Whereas one of the more well-respected modern editions of the same passage is:
Shy. Signior Antonio, many a time and oft
In the Rialto you have rated me
About my moneys and my usances:
Still have I borne it with a patient shrug,
(For suff’rance is the badge of all our tribe)
You call me misbeliever, cut-throat dog,
And spet upon my Jewish gaberdine,
And all for use of that which is mine own.
The second version looks much cleaner, and is much easier for a modern-day actor to work with (it’s much easier to run lines when you aren’t tripping over all those crazy u’s and v’s). When performed (or simply read aloud), the two versions sound identical.
Note the change of “suffrance” to “suff’rance” instead of “sufferance”; this indicates to the actor that the word is to be pronounced with two syllables rather than three (which is important when the character is speaking in verse). This is a little snag to a reader, but as I said before, it’s a script, not a novel.
Of course, many actors (especially those with a lot of experience with Shakespeare) prefer to work with the folio editions because they’re truer to the words penned by the Bard himself. It’s actually considered a good idea to consult several different editions of a play one is working on, and draw upon the different perspectives for the production at hand. Honestly, I suspect that the reason there’s so much badly done Shakespeare out there is that it takes much additional work to prepare a Shakespeare role, and many actors are too lazy to go the extra mile (or simply aren’t given enough time to do so).
Flees thread, pursued by bear
Now, if you want to see some well filmed modern Shakespeare, why not ask the fine folks at Troma studios?
I hear that rap music is popular with today’s younger crowd, so it would seem inevitable that there would be some leakage
If you think that they are identical, except for the updating of the language, I’d guess you’ve never seen either one.
There’s a difference between being non-identical and having “no relation to Shakespeare whatever.”
Even the “Bob & Doug” movie Strange Brew can claim a strong connection to Shakespeare.
Of course, neither Strange Brew or West Side Story can be considered reasonably equivalent to the plays from which they take their inspiration – that rather goes without saying. That’s probably why jrfranchi included a winkie when he suggested WST.
What Larry Mudd said. “Not identical” does not equal “no relation whatsoever”. Laurents was clearly inspired by Romeo and Juliet.
*Hipsters, flipsters, and finger-poppin’ daddies,
Knock me your lobes,
I come to lay Ceasar out,
Not to hip you to him.
The bad jazz that a cat blows
Wails long after he’s cut out.
The groovy is often stashed with their frames,
So don’t put Caesar down. *
Not what I’d call satirical, exactly. But the beauty of what Lord Buckley did was in the words he used, too.
Rico: A question for you re:
I know you think this is hilarious, to divert “stupid” questions to an alternate forum, but if you examine the vapid responses I’ve received, you’ll understand why I do not feel you have done me any favors.
Did you really mean to insult me, as many of the above people have done?
Are you of that club that says a person who asks my OP question is a cretin who failed high school freshman English and is now looking for a Cliff’s Notes video to help cram for the make-up test? And that, as such, I deserve a round pummeling for asking questions with obvious answers. And instead of simple sober factual answers I should be happy with dismissive negative opinions and jokes at my expense.
Allow me to disabuse you of that notion.
I’m a Thespian who has* read* and rehearsed and* played* parts in *virtually all *of Shakespeare’s plays over the last few decades. Including the less produced ones like Cymbeline and Pericles, Prince of Tyre.
So unlike the sneers recorded above about my not understanding the words or beauty of Shakespeare, my “fault” is much simpler: I am not a scholar of Shakespearian derivative works. The scripts I see are selected by directors, and they seldom contain mentions of related versions, except what variations exist between the various octavos and folios.
So, the place I intended this question to be answered was GQ, which your instructions say is the factual forum. The one to use when Cecil does not answer a question, but still when some authoritative answer is wished for.
And if posters can be encouraged to take a question at face value and be serious for once …
… then the only legitimate answers to the OP would be of the form:
- "Yes, there was a version of Lear written two centuries ago by those selfsame Lambs, who even then thought a more modern vocabulary would be usable in some contexts. However, it was in a separate book which is now out of print.
- “No, this has never been tried for any of his plays, and I have this as my reference: link”
The question could be asked and answered in two posts. Just facts. No jokes. No opinions. No condescension. Is that really asking too much of GQ? Rico:
I know you think this is hilarious, to divert “stupid” questions to an alternate forum, but if you examine the vapid responses I’ve received, you’ll understand why I do not feel you have done me any favors.
Did you really mean to insult me, as many of the above people have done?
Are you of that club that says a person who asks my OP question is a cretin who failed high school freshman English and is now looking for a Cliff’s Notes video to help cram for the make-up test? And that, as such, I deserve a round pummeling for asking questions with obvious answers. And instead of simple sober factual answers I should be happy with dismissive negative opinions and jokes at my expense.
Allow me to disabuse you of that notion.
I’m a Thespian who has* read* and rehearsed and* played* parts in *virtually all *of Shakespeare’s plays over the last few decades. Including the less produced ones like Cymbeline and Pericles, Prince of Tyre.
So unlike the sneers recorded above about my not understanding the words or beauty of Shakespeare, my “fault” is much simpler: I am not a scholar of Shakespearian derivative works. The scripts I see are selected by directors, and they seldom contain mentions of related versions, except what variations exist between the various octavos and folios.
So, the place I intended this question to be answered was GQ, which your instructions say is the factual forum. The one to use when Cecil does not answer a question, but still when some authoritative answer is wished for.
And if posters can be encouraged to take a question at face value and be serious for once …
… then the only legitimate answers to the OP would be of the form:
- "Yes, there was a version of Lear written two centuries ago by those selfsame Lambs, who even then thought a more modern vocabulary would be usable in some contexts. However, it was in a separate book which is now out of print.
- “No, this has never been tried for any of his plays, and I have this as my reference: link”
The question could be asked and answered in two posts. Just facts. No jokes. No opinions. No condescension. Am I really asking too much of GQ?
[ Sorry about the double paste. Obviously not intentional. ]
You need slightly thicker skin pocelene, A few jokes and a few “dismissive negative opinions” should be expected to such an OP. Your opening post did not go into the details that your rant just did. You just in effect insulted everybody in the thread far worse than anyone insulted you.
Have some patience and work on your Original Posts and better answers will be forthcoming. It is hard to tell the difference between a 16 year old looking for an easy read and a Thespian from your OP.
I will apologize for myself as I thought in all honesty you were a Teen and not someone looking for a detailed answer. For future reference the little Wink symbol does mean it is a jest and you don’t need to lecture us on the fact WSS is not R&J.
Good Luck in future postings and have fun.
Hey, relax. There’s no judgement on the merit of your OP – it’s just a Cafe question.
There are lots of straight-forward, “factual” questions about the arts. They still belong in the Cafe. No biggee.
I agree. The allusions to mythology and such are the hardest things to get, I find, and the least necessary to understand in terms of plot or characters.
Not hard to understand in context. They’re walking and it’s late at night. But if you don’t know what the Antipodes are (and who does?), you’ll probably get thrown off by it. I think there’s no way to translate it into plain 20th century English without making people wonder why Bassanio says it in the first place. In cases like that I think it’s better to just make a different joke that’s “in the spirit” of the original, not just updating the words.
Oi! We Antipodeans know where we are!
Aye, it’s funny how much lower the vocabulary expectations are for folks in the last century or so.
“How funny it’ll seem to come out among the people that walk with their heads downwards! The… antipathies, I think?”
Alice was supposed to be exceptionally muddle-headed – but how many children today would even be familiar enough with either of those words to get them confused?
Does Forbidden Planet count?