Wednesday, February 20th 2019
Subject: all about eve
Great! It appears that I get to see Gillian
Anderson in the “Cinema” after all!
(…)
Yesterday I read on until the scene where
Antony is taking his leave of Cleopatra after Fulvia’s death and watched the
RSC’s production of this part. And I got totally fascinated with the scene. I already
thought after London that I am “through” with the play, but in the cinema I got
this feeling that I won’t be anytime soon. Now I found a complexity and truth
in this scene about what is going on between men and women when it gets
complicated which I couldn’t see before. The reason is probably that real life
somehow got closer to me, and I remembered a moment I witnessed by accident:
when my brother sent something to his new girlfriend which he had intended to
send to his wife. (Classic!) And he got hell!!! I couldn’t help thinking: You
stupid cow! You are almost fifty and are behaving like a brainless teenager.
(As you might have felt about Cleopatra?) But, reading Shakespeare, I realized
that this kind of behaviour is not completely irrational. Of course Antony is
lying to Cleopatra – as he is lying to everybody else – and how is she supposed
to know if he is lying at that moment? (My brother lied to everybody, including
us, and I understood why. But I am clearly not the one whose happiness depends on
this relationship!) I’ll go on reading …
Wednesday, February 20th 2019
Subject: answer: all about eve
Hi Barbara,
Great that “Cinema” is
taking this up again! I hope that I will be able to see the production live in
four weeks (…)
So, either you got on with
reading A+C more than I did or you are just cleverer! I have come to the part
where Antony is taking his leave of Octavia to go to Egypt, and I cannot find
any complexity. Really good, but rather straightforward. When I am reading it I
don’t think that Cleopatra is behaving like a teenager anymore, at least in the
beginning she is acting quite normal. Only when the messenger brings her the
news about Antony’s marriage do I find her horrible. The scene is exactly as it
was on the stage: totally daft. She might have behaved like Ken’s Henry V who –
as a perfect ruler – conveys his anger about the Dauphin’s present of tennis
balls, so that he can take it back to the Dauphin, but then says calmly: “Get
thee hence in peace!” – which comes as a surprise to the messenger who is
afraid of becoming the target of princely rage. Her grilling the messenger
about Octavia I find totally normal – of course she wants to hear that Octavia
is not her equal! – and the messenger - having profited by his past experience
– does the right thing and is telling her only bad things about Octavia. It is
a funny scene, but I am convinced everybody (man or woman from the age of 10 to
100) would behave like Cleo.
Is Antony really lying to
Cleopatra? In your opinion, is he only thinking of Rome all this time and only
pretending to care about her? I don’t see it like this. Or do you mean that
Fulvia and he actually had something, that it is significant that she made war
in his name? As this information is revealed only later I’ll have to go back to
the beginning. In your opinion, Antony appears to be rather a disagreeable
fellow … Okay, this he was already in the NT’s production of “Julius Caesar”,
and the manner of his death certainly doesn’t contribute to letting him appear
as a hero. Maybe I have to take this into account more.
I’ll go on reading …
(Translating
this bit and dwelling on it was rather interesting because of what it told me
ABOUT MYSELF. Especially in “Shakespeare”, I often wonder about which
characters I like and dislike. (There are not that many “likes”, apart from
very strange ones like Queen Margaret or Richard III – which might even be a
selection of the most horrible people in “Shakespeare” … And I always DISLIKED
Henry V, even though I partly admire him for being clever and ruthless đ, probably just because we are SUPPOSED to think of
him as a hero.) I certainly disliked Marc Antony from the start – the Marc
Antony in “Julius Caesar” not quite as much as the one in “Antony & Cleopatra”.
Which might be because, in “Julius Caesar”, he basically is a shrewd politician
and demagogue (like Richard III), whereas in “Antony & Cleopatra” he is a
decaying HERO. And I tend to forget that most people are fond of heroes –
whereas I remember distinctly that I never fell for heroes, not even as a
little girl. Instead I tended to fall for the villains, and, of course, this
had a great influence on how I am reading NOW. I even realize that I have a
theory why this is so. I always knew that my “bad” content was a genuine part
of myself, and I stood up to my elders to defend it, especially when I was
still a child. (Later on I got rather meek and cowardly, but this was, as I
found out when I was grown-up, mostly a disguise. I just wanted people out of
my hair to be able to carry on as I pleased.) The reason that I turned out like
this is probably that I was an oldest child, and that my parents were so
pleased with having me that they totally neglected breaking my spirit BEFORE
the age of three – quite as if I had been a boy. After that they probably
realized that I had become unmanageable, and that drastic measures were in
order (- with which I basically agreed! Maybe not at that age but certainly
later I could see that the “bad” content can become dangerous for me and others
and needed to be controlled – though not by “deleting” it but by transforming
it.) This doesn’t mean that I don’t find heroic qualities in people attractive
- like everything that is indicative of personal strength – but I only ever LIKE
“flawed” heroes. No explanation, though, why ANTONY felt so disagreeable …? (until
Ralph Fiennes made him “available” to me!) Maybe it is because I feel that he
is fundamentally dishonest – not just with other people but, first of all, with
himself!)
Thursday,
February 21st 2019
Subject: answer:
all about eve
I think I
have got it now: When you were reading it you found Cleopatra’s behaviour understandable
and not so much like a teenager as it appeared to you on the stage. So: Sophie
Okonedo had it wrong. This might be in fact as I saw it myself, even though I
expressed it differently (in my blog).
I think, though, that WHAT she does she does convincingly, and she can convey
this quality of a woman who sweeps men off their feet. And she has this
vulnerability, especially in the end, when she is mourning Antony’s death,
which “got” me and suddenly released personal content on my part (see my first
post on A+C).
“Is Antony really lying to
Cleopatra? In your opinion, is he only thinking of Rome all this time and only
pretending to care about her? I don’t see it like this.”
This is
one of the thrilling questions I came to ask myself during the recorded show in
the cinema, and then when I read this scene again. It is so thrilling because,
I think, not even Antony could answer this! Obviously he does some
soul-searching and comes to the conclusion that he has to break with Cleopatra.
(“These strong Egyptian fetters I must break.”) But, of course, he never
seriously considers to forgo the good sex and the great opportunity of being
himself. But the POSSIBILITY is very real for Cleopatra – as the new marriage
proves right away! – and she panics. The truth of the situation is in my
opinion that (certain) men, unlike most women, tend to get in this position
where they have to decide but don’t want to – and then get compelled to lie.
And the lying is always most convincing when they can make themselves believe
that they are sincere. Accordingly, some men become such accomplished liars.
And this scene basically contains everything about this real life issue.
(O, this might be the synopsis of my post about lying
in “Shakespeare” and elsewhere which I never get to write. For example “House
of Cards”: Claire Underwood is right, of course. “We” don’t lie because we like
it, but we are lying all the time because we have to.)
Thursday, February
21st 2019
Subject: answer:
all about eve
Good
morning!
“When you
were reading it you found Cleopatra’s behaviour understandable and not so much
like a teenager as it appeared to you on the stage.”
That is
what I meant! Though I didn’t feel that Sophie Okonedo made me understand why
men are falling for Cleopatra. This might be because I find women like her so
horrible that I cannot understand why men find this kind of behaviour attractive.
But maybe this is what men want, and I might still work on it. đ
As to the vulnerability,
I’ll see when I am getting there. I didn’t buy it on the stage, probably
because I couldn’t see the genuine emotions behind it – which might have been
because she put me off in the scene with the messenger which I found so
dreadful.
I understand
now what you wanted to say about Antony’s emotional state. If I understand it
like this Ralph Fiennes played it very well. It is really appalling how little
men are able to reflect on themselves (or how arrogant they are: I am entitled
to everything, and why not!) But it may be that we are all lying to ourselves,
even people who – like myself – see themselves as reasonable and rational.
(Basically: Yes! Of course we do! But I usually don’t
get at MY blind spots because they are BLIND spots … Maybe it is cheap to “take
it out” on men? And I never found it the least bit difficult to understand why
men fall for women like Cleopatra instead of women like me! They quite often might
pay a price for WHAT THEY WANT that is much too high – but nobody in his right
mind pays shit for what they didn’t want in the first place!)
There is
another thing I understand differently: is he really himself when he is with
Cleo? I think it is just a part of him, the one that is glad to escape the
Roman “corset”. Rome is definitely an important part of him. It might be like Freud’s
id (Es) and super-ego (Ăber-Ich) which don’t get integrated within the ego
(Ich) but remain separated. The ego is supposed to be the part that is
unavailable to us.
O, I initially skipped this precise analysis of the
matter at hand! Basically saves me the bother of writing another post. In fact,
it became the question I “worked with” reading the play again. (And it helps me
with personally disagreeing with Freud. If he is actually right about the ego being
unavailable to “us” I might BEGIN to understand human suffering. I probably
always thought that his theory is just an expression of the inhuman frame of
mind people (especially the female part!) had to live in at the time. But this
might not be so! Maybe a lot more people than I think take their ids and
super-egos quite seriously, and I might actually be right about myself and, all
this time, just lacked this kindred spirit who would never have believed for a
second that masturbating might be something bad …)
Wednesday,
February 27th 2019
Subject: answer:
all about eve
Good
morning Claudia!
I am
afraid real life overtook „Shakespeare“, and I might have to defer my reading
indefinitely. This is what I wrote earlier in the “MacCafĂŠ”, waiting for my
bus:
Of
course I find women like Cleopatra totally horrible – as I wrote in my first
post: one of the very few characters in “Shakespeare” I would have liked to
strangle with my bare hands. But this doesn’t automatically prevent me from
being able to identify with them – or rather with the “human stuff” they
represent. (This works exclusively when they are fictional, though. In real
life I have zero empathy for people who mess with me or people I like!) Adapting
Richard Armitage about “The Crucible”: We don’t have to condone what the guy is
doing, but if we don’t understand him and feel with him we are missing the
point! (There should be a “red line”, of course, about somebody like the “Red
Dragon” – or Voldemort! I would never have found Voldemort the least bit interesting
if Ralph Fiennes hadn’t played him WITH EMPATHY. There is no sane reason for
it!)
On the
other hand: women like her only EXIST because men are what they are. And there
is no indication that they might ever change into something “reasonable”.
(Rather often, though, men and women are working very well in real life because
there are lots of women who are feminine and attractive AND have good human
qualities on top of that! …)
I didn’t
make progress with Antony (before I got crossed
by real life) – which galls me because I will have forgotten what I saw in
the “Cinema” when I’ll finally get to write about him.
Wednesday,
February 27th 2019
Subject: answer:
all about eve
Good morning Barbara!
As I am in need of a holiday anyway (only two weeks to go!) I am fine
with deferring the discussion. I hope real life isn’t too bad!
Don’t be fortunes fool!
(I didn’t really think about
“fortune’s fool” until now! I always think I am taking measures against it, but
this might be an illusion … Fortunately, in this case, it wasn’t MY real life!)
Thursday, Mars 7th 2019
Subject: great holidays and greetings to london from me!
Hi Claudia,
Didn’t want to forget to wish you a great holiday and wonderful theatre
moments! (…)
At the moment I am reading A+C again because “real life” gave me a break
(probably just for now!) Your question if Antony really is himself when he is
with Cleopatra proofed so complex that I couldn’t just answer it, but it turned
out the perfect question for reading the play again.
This weekend I’ll actually be home and might finally look into “Rome”.
Friday, March 8th 2019
Subject: answer: great holidays …
Hi Barbara,
(…)
I think I
already wrote that I find it fascinating that Antony had at least two sons with
Cleopatra. I would show this on the stage because it changes their relationship
fundamentally. Especially Cleopatra’s behaviour would be more understandable
because this represents an additional dimension of their relationship.
Enjoy
“Rome”! There is a second season with A+C – and the change in Antony is really
fascinating. I could get it to you next week …
Friday, March 8th 2019
Subject: answer: great holidays …
Dear
Claudia,
I actually
started to watch „Rome“ yesterday and am thrilled. (Ciaran Hinds as Caesar! And
not just him … So many great stories within the history!) But I will certainly
watch it very thoroughly (until I’ll understand everything!) and this will
probably take plenty of time.
Maybe
we’ll meet soon after London! I don’t really know if I am jealous that you get
to see Martin Freeman in the theatre …? At the moment I don’t know anything
because I am over my head in dust and sweat working in the stacks. But there is
so much fascinating stuff on DVD anyway which I still have to watch that I am
rather content that nobody I HAVE to see does something important at the moment
– as far as I know. But how would I know? I might be missing something really
important right now …
