Sean took the MCAT today! yay! done and done. although he plans to re-take it in August just to be safe, i am so happy he has one under his belt. i wasn't happy to stay up til 4:30am to help him wake up and make him a good breakfast, but i think it was totally worth it to make sure he started this important day on the right foot! and tonight we will have vegetarian chili, some of our favorite DVR'd shows, a bottle of wine, and some well-deserved relaxation. that is, of course, after we finish cleaning the apartment and i finish my blog. okay, on your mark get set go!
here's what i learned today, and i have to say, i'm pretty excited about this one:
-1 Henry IV starts off where Richard II left off. Henry wants to get his people together against a common enemy in the Holy Lands, but he can't because there's too much civil war going on at home. the Scots and Whales are both giving him trouble, and his men are off fighting.
-here's who helped him win the throne: Percy (aka Hotspur), Northumberland, Worcester, and Edmund Mortimer. remember when Richard warned... Northumberland was it?... that soon things would change? he said that those who participate in treason are likely to do so again. and guess what?!? it's looking like Richard may have been completely correct. Henry's people are frustrated with the outcome, and perhaps Mortimer would be a better option for the throne.
-i find it interesting that Bevington says that 'Shakespeare's sympathies are many sided' in this play because i have been saying over and over again in previous entries that i have found Shakespeare to be incredibly skilled at creating split-sympathy in his readers and/or viewers. if Bevington is pointing it out now, i can't wait to see what Shakespeare has in store for us!
-women are pretty much absent again. boo. but what they do offer is a different perspective on the men in the play. they kind of show the men's true colors. even though they're not a big part of the play which is kind of blah, it's cool that Shakespeare has these women be the voices of reason, the truth-givers, the wise members of their families, etc. i can dig that.
-Shakespeare seems to be exploring the relationships between fathers and sons in this one. there is, of course, King Henry and his son, Prince Hal. there is also Northumberland and his son, Hotspur. but beyond these obvious choices, there is the relationship between Henry and Hotspur (he at one point jokes that he wishes Hotspur had been his son) and the one between Hal and Falstaff.
-yes! he is here! Falstaff. here is something Bevington said about Falstaff that i loved: 'we excuse much in him because he lusts after life with such an appetite and ingratiates himself to others by inviting them to laugh at his expense.' apparently he is a great foil for Hotspur, his complete opposite. can't wait to finally read this character. and can't wait to read this play! treason, action, wit, confusing relationship dynamics, and Falstaff? sounds good to me!
sounds like we're in for a good one. i hope you'll join me!
for tomorrow: act 1, scenes 1 and 2