Unboxing Shakespeare's First Folio | V&A

[@laovvi7140]

A bit more on the no-white-gloves shift: this has been a change in many museums, galleries, and archives around the world and is because if you are washing your hands well, right before handling pieces, the oils and dirt on your hands should be virtually non-existent. The other major reason I've heard is that the wearing of white gloves dulls your ability to sense what you are doing and your grip, which both lead to more accidental damage.

[@voraciousreader3341]

I’m so glad the librarian took the time to mention that! I get so tired of comments from people who obviously watch only to pick out “errors” in these videos, apparently so they have a forum with which to make themselves appear to be more intelligent or knowledgeable than the experts, and not wearing gloves is one of their favorites! Of course, they aren’t intelligent enough to realize that the only thing they’re showing off is their ignorance!

[@hsmd4533]

Ok but why do the gloves have to be white? Seems racist.

[@tbmofoulprinceromero]

I learnt about this when watching Philomena Cunk.

[@MrDavidkaplan]

I noticed that change myself last summer when I visited the special collections room at the National Library of Scotland. More than a decade earlier, when I was translating David Hume's Treatise into Hebrew, I visited the same room and was given a pillow and a pair of gloves to be able to touch a copy of the first edition of the book, from 1739. This time, when I came to have another look, there was only the pillow. I also had a look at a first edition of Boswell's travel to the Hebrides, which was printed with a big folded map glued unto one of the first pages, which is already about 250 years old, and I can't imagine trying to open it with cotton gloves on my hands.

[@Nullifidian]

Also, the kind of paper being handled is a reason for the difference. Wood-pulp paper is much more likely to be affected by oil on the hands than rag paper is, and the First Folio was printed on rag paper. It's not until the the late 18th/early 19th centuries when wood-pulp paper came in, while the First Folio is a 17th century book.

[@tummy_fritters]

As Elizabeth James points out, this folio signifies that people were reading Shakespeare on the page. It's a matter I've taken for granted, but it signifies the literary importance of his work. A modern parallel might look like a television show script deemed worthy of reading (as opposed to viewing) in university courses. Shakespeare truly transcended his medium and time.

[@muskndusk]

Not many people could read then. It's slightly annoying that the first folio tends to be used as the definitive Shakespeare, though some editions do contain parts from the quarto editions, which it's argued are closer to the plays as the audiences of Shakespeare's lifetime would have seen them. For example, The Taming of the Shrew is a very different play in the Quarto editions. It's less "sexist" because Sly, the drunk who the players act out the main body of the play for, constantly interrupts with snide comments which undermine the aspects which are particularly distateful to modern audiences/readers.

[@singlespies]

@@muskndusk It has been my assumption that the Quartos were often published earlier than the folio. Maybe this isn't always the case. However, didn't they say TTOTS hadn't been published prior to the Folio? I also read (I think) that the Quartos were sometimes cheap editions, often published without the permission of the author. I understand there are no definitive versions of any of his plays (the text of the plays can vary from Folio to Folio). If all this is the case, why do you say the Quartos might be closer to the original versions?

[@muskndusk]

@@singlespies I'm not saying that the quartos are closer to the original versions but I've heard/read experts claim this. For example, if an editor relies purely on the First Folio of Hamlet the famous "To be or not to be" soliloquy is very different to the one we usually hear/read. Most editors use both the quarto and the first folio versions. The quartos were published a long time prior to the first folio.

[@muskndusk]

@@singlespies If you can find "The Secret Life of Books, Shakespeare's First Folio" this explains much about the differences between the versions. It used to be on youtube, but seems to have been taken down. I think it was a BBC programme.

[@oolala53]

I know what you're trying to say but I wonder about the comparison to most television shows now. Though Shakespeare was popular, I don't think the works were considered "pop", like most TV shows now are analogous to pop music, IMHO. Modern literary playwrights are read (as well as viewed) on the page, too. Perhaps TV scripts are as well, but I would imagine as a different phenomenon.

[@leftyfourguns]

It looks so modern. Like this is how we still lay out our own books and scripts. I guess if it works you don't really need to change it much.

[@kittymervine6115]

I was lucky enough to see a Folio I the private collection of a US owner. Who is taking excellent care of it, and many other priceless and historic books. Touching it, is a highlight of my life. Among seeing the other books. I'll remember it forever.

[@joshuakirkham9593]

An excellent look at how literature (even very famous literature)has changed as the culture of reading has changed.

[@classiclife7204]

Some amusing bits. Clearly the presenters are sick and tired of commenters berating experts for not wearing white gloves and address the subject directly - thanks for that! I enjoyed the older lady's barely hidden irritation at the fact that a few of these relics are STILL in private hands. I also enjoyed the scribbled ephemera of previous owners. "A very fine play!" 😄

[@frontenac5083]

Indeed she is, and I can imagine why. I am sick and tired of the white glove brigade myself. I can't imagine being a professional working with old books and seeing these comments all the time. I would simply delete them if I can, I think. Idiots are draining.

[@tm502010]

This is absolutely stunning! So lovely, and so well preserved! The quality of the printing, binding, paper, presentation - all of it. It’s glorious!

[@alberttrudel4822]

What an excellent presentation of the first folio, and of the many ways Shakespeare's plays have come down to us. Kudos not only to the wonderful scholars in the video, but also to the producers and editors, who have made this compact, informative, artistic, and virtually flawless presentation.

[@89128]

It has been said by several experts, that the libraries of "Great Houses" contain many treasures, many not known to the present owners.

[@llywrch7116]

But are there many of these "Great Houses" left? The rich were never very numerous to begin with, & one would expect most of these mansions to have been examined, if only by auction house appraisers as part of liquidating the estate of the last heir or when the family finds it no longer can maintain such a large & antiquated building.

[@gregorymartin6488]

I have restored many old books although none as far back as this First Folio: It was quiet common for Bookbinders to use scrap and waste paper as part of the binding, these would never be seen unless the book was severely damaged or rebound, most of the paper was waste paper from the printing press but I have seen parts of old handwritten ledgers, the most interesting was the shipping movements from a English port sometime in the late 18th Century and parts of an original music score. More than likely the written manuscript of the First Folio was delivered to the printer who set up the type, printed 4 or 8 pages, then unsorted the type to be then set up to print the next 4/8 pages and so on through the book. When the printing was finished the manuscript was probably in the waste basket to be reused or re-cycled into cardboard, nothing was wasted, paper was expensive.

[@rosescott9299]

That guy loved his book so much he had a whole bookcase (a stunningly beautiful one at that) built just for it! And I can’t say I wouldn’t do the same. Just wonderful!

[@nannesoar]

Im just as (if not more) facinated by how qualified she must be to handle/show it like this.

[@ringer4883]

This is a facsimile not a real folio. You can buy this 400th anniversary edition for $150. You can “handle” it too.

[@not2tees]

It is touching, in a broadly human sense, to see the care and interest and even the countless projections onto Shakespeare and his writing. Charming.

[@codex3048]

That matching box and binding is exquisite. In case anyone out there is unaware, this isn't how the book was originally bound. The original binding was calfskin.

[@rosymelanie]

I can't stop laughing at the actor named "Thomas Poope".

[@vamuseum]

I was waiting for someone to spot that

[@jerkchickenblog]

@@vamuseum i caught it too. sorry

[@gemmasalmon9667]

V&A! This would’ve made an amazing ASMR video… give the people what they want 😴 Also, love the fact the lady mentions why she’s not wearing white gloves. Literally every other video on your channel is “why aren’t they wearing gloves? 🥴”

[@Backto5oh5]

Second this! I want the ASMR version

[@gonnabeayogi1445]

I third this ❤

[@Delilah.Elizabeth]

Same here.

[@jemandjemand2362]

this is a treasure. i never imagined something like this existed. 400 years old. oh my

[@artlikebread]

Could the “G” stand for “Globe,” as in “Globe Theatre?” Thank you for a beautiful and lovely overview of these precious texts!

[@MkeLou582gmailcom]

Hello

[@vamuseum]

This is a brilliant suggestion!

[@andreasneumann-pw1zw]

Or it means "great,grat".

[@andreasneumann-pw1zw]

I❤ Shakespeare.

[@econhelp583]

Fantastic presentation! Thanks very much; it was great to see and learn about these famous books!

[@mcwjes]

I really want to smell this book! How does a 400+ year folio smell?

[@vamuseum]

Not like perfume and roses, I can tell you that 🤨

[@Charliefarley170287]

I was hoping to find a fellow book sniffer in the comments. Old books smell as beautiful as they look. Imagine the muskiness of this beauty!

[@jadenwaz9585]

probably like Thomas Poope

[@parkerraphelt9657]

Highly recommend the play Book of Will by Lauren Gunderson. It’s a modern telling of the creation of the First Folio, featuring many of the men who were mentioned in this video (Henry Condell & John Hemings are the main characters, and Ben Jonson is such a fun character)

[@ZoeLateNight]

V&A, Hire me. I’d be so happy doing detailed work, ensconced in a cozy windowless room padded and lined with books and all sorts of antiques to care for. I love when books are personally marked with curious notes and little scribblings. ✨🧚🏻💚

[@dokholladay]

The same "G" symbol is on the page of actor's initials at 9:57 next to "Old Shepheard". Perhaps the owner indicated which plays the owner himself had performed in with a "G" symbol, or alternatively the owner's favorite performer.

[@souverainement]

Had the same thought

[@designedwarrior]

More, more, more please!!! thank you. I would love to know about the printing process and the price of an original folio then and now, the paper, ink, binding basically how it was all done.

[@kathyjohnson2043]

When I first started performing in musical theatre, most still had 'sides', just my lines with perhaps a few words as a cue.

[@ThreadBomb]

It seems like it would make the work much more difficult.

[@_786RP]

Folio : big books 🤩

[@Jeffhowardmeade]

I like big books and I cannot lie. No Separate Peace or Catcher in the Rye...

[@Rosarium2007]

I have seen the First Folio that is on display at the Dallas (TX) Public Library. Such a beautiful book. I wonder if the “G” might actually be a Q and stand for Quattro, as in “I also have the Quattro of this play in my library.” Someone with the financial means who was really into Shakespeare wanting to collect all the Quattros along with the First Folio seems highly likely.

[@Nullifidian]

The publishing format is called a quarto. A Quattro is a car.

[@treasurechest123]

Good idea! I agree it could be a Q for quarto.

[@princesslisamarie7860]

Does anyone know who L. Digges is at 5:18??? That's my name??? Even the L!!!! Edit: Nevermind found it!! And yes it's the same family line!!! Wow!!!😮

[@monkhouse9305]

Could the 'G' represent a particular actor? Maybe the owner of the folio, or an acquaintance of theirs? At 10:00 I notice that the 'G' is present beside the character of Old Shepherd indicating that 'G' played this part, and therefore the other plays mentioned are plays that 'G' acted in, perhaps?

[@treasurechest123]

Wonderful! I think it would be helpful to also mention that, in addition to the many adaptations of these plays with which we are familiar (like West Side Story), many of Shakespeares plays were also HIS adaptations of well-known stories…few were unique to Shakespeare. His brilliance resided in his language and plot execution not necessarily in unique plot developments.

[@marcusaurelius1477]

You have some serious issues ...

[@williamrobinson7435]

I would be most interested in seeing some of the annotations in the early quarto editions of individual plays. I reckon these must have been used by directors, and anything that can give insight into the methods used must be of interest.. Thank you for this! Most illuminating. 🌟👍

[@skyegypze3982]

Happy Birthday Will!

[@alainap4165]

I am dying to know where her plaid sweater/blazer is from!

[@jeffkeith637]

It’s gorgeous.

[@whoisdamaris]

Oh I'd be afraid to even breathe in the presence of the first folio

[@JB-fv6vx]

If the writing is pre 1642, could the "G" mean the owner saw the play at the Globe theatre?

[@thenoblegasargon]

That was my guess too!

[@JB-fv6vx]

@@thenoblegasargon The "R" on the contents page could be for The Rose theatre. Could also be a specific actor, but it is not clear if the content page hand is the same one as the other annotations

[@ThreadBomb]

Simple me thought the G probably stood for "Good", meaning that the reader liked the play!

[@MrMartibobs]

@@ThreadBomb me too!

[@michelhv]

Looks like a nineteenth century binding, though.

[@goodlookinouthomie1757]

I've got myself a copy of the Folger facsimile and even that is a precious possession of mine. I can only imagine actually leaving through the authentic article. I'm surprised to see that it's not a drab brown (like my facsimile) but this beautiful vibrant red and boxed up with velvet lining no less 🤣

[@GreenTeaViewer]

One thing I wasn't aware of until recently was that the First Folio was not simply a typical book of the time, publishing a popular playwright. It was an unusual and expensive undertaking done by people who were well aware of his importance.

[@KateMich12]

We need as ASMR with the pages turning! So lovely!

[@jadenwaz9585]

“Thomas Poope” at 3:15 made me lol

[@prashantmishra1994]

Hi there! The first folio should be one of national tresures.It's because,people around world could'nt have had the opportunity to read great masterpieces of William Shakespeare. It should be World Heritage Literary Book. Thanks & regards.

[@CapAnson12345]

Imagine if tucked away in a chest somewhere in an attic someone discovered one of Shakespeare's personal copies of one of his plays. Autographed with notes and stuff. It would instantly become the most valuable book in existence.

[@Jeffhowardmeade]

And every Shakespeare denier in the world would instantly refuse to recognize its existence.

[@matthewbbenton]

Unlikely, as Shakespeare could barely sign his own name properly.

[@smadaf]

It would be nice if this video had said whether the bindings of that folio and that quarto were the original ones.

[@RocLobo358]

This makes sense that you would read them. It makes it so much better if you can skim the soliloquies. I find myself spacing out in the middle of them when spoken. Either that or I get lost in the metaphors and forget what is going on and it becomes more like a Beckett play in my head

[@voraciousreader3341]

Just a few years ago, I listened to John Gielgud perform as Hamlet in a production which was originally performed on the radio in the 1940s (BBC, of course) and I didn’t need a play in front of me even though it was the entire play with no cuts. For some reason, I don’t need the plays in front of me to follow the action. Gielgud gave an interview about his performances of Hamlet when large amounts were cut (think Laurence Olivier’s filmed version), as well as when he performed the whole play, and he said audiences were much more riveted during the latter, because the former didn’t flow and was therefore more confusing, an interesting observation. Among my family and friends over the years, it seems that those with a natural affinity for and love of poetry have a much easier time with Shakespeare, but people should absolutely adapt whatever strategy works for them in order to enjoy the wonders of these incredible works!

[@kencur9690]

Shakespeare is all about the metaphors!

[@rob4canada1]

At 3:49, does anyone know what the style of art is called that surrounds the title and first letter of the paragraph? It's gorgeous. I would love to learn more about it.

[@yonathanasefaw9001]

I want this folio in my collection!

[@doclime4792]

I would like one too and the pillow it's sitting on also.

[@codex3048]

The reason it was printed folio size is that Jacobean publishers were not very keen on multi-volume editions, so with a prolific author like Shakespeare, they had to fit everything (except the poems) under two covers. Only in the 1700s did multi-volume books become the norm.

[@clivewismayer2404]

I noticed the ‘G’ against one of the players’ names. Maybe ‘G’ was someone who had appeared in the plays so annotated?

[@ThreadBomb]

Do you have any "bad quartos" at the V&A? It might be fun to compare some of their points with a more legitimate text.

[@annettefournier9655]

I was wondering what happened to the handling with gloves. Thank you .

[@s.p.8803]

It was found that hands do not dammage books after all, providing that they are clean and dry. On the contrary, gloves (fabric or otherwise) diminish the sensitivity, sense of touch, of your skin and you might tear up or crease the paper. So all libraries recommand no gloves. The exception being toxicity for your skin, like lead or other substances.

[@frontenac5083]

@@s.p.8803 You're of course right (and all this should be common sense), but I'm afraid it's not "all libraries", unless you meant to say "all librairies _should_ recommend no gloves". You always find some ignoramuses in backwaters progress has yet to reach.

[@s.p.8803]

@@frontenac5083 Yes, you're right, some may still have kept the old bad habits. But I think that the major ones, who possess really valuable books, like the national librairies, the ones from universities and museums seem to apply this rule, now. At least in Europe and the U.S., which are the ones I know.

[@williamfahey6066]

Wonderful video. Thank you so much, Jeff

[@pauljesson1]

The British Library has three copies. The Folger in Washington DC has 82.

[@daviddickason6729]

Is it known who bound the copy that is presented in the lovely box?

[@vladimirandreevich]

I wonder what is the meaning of those G's in the table of contents

[@pleiades.puppets]

This was fabulous. Thank you!

[@apollocobain8363]

Wasn't the Pavier book in 1619 the first collection? Same printer - Jaggard.

[@AndreFurlanwilliamblake]

extraordinaire

[@jdelarosa89]

I can’t say I have ever seen a book rest on a pillow.

[@dannydubya9410]

Lets have a quick moment of silence for Thomas Poope

[@susprime7018]

Thank you, a great treat to see.

[@James-In-Exile]

Another wonderful video, thanks!

[@anna.rrrrrr]

So interesting , pelase keep these coming ❤❤

[@mantronixtube]

that’s crazy ! 💕

[@christirandazzo3769]

Amazing!!

[@jamesn8236]

Superb.

[@tedlawrence4189]

I had one of those! It was handed down in my father's family. I traded it for a stack of pornographic magazines when I was young. It was worth it though,as I really didenjoy, looking at them.

[@misanthropelife]

What the actual f*ck 😅😅😅

[@Cats-a-Tonic]

Hello, just a cheeky promotion, kind of. I have just completed Act 1, Scene 1, of "Hamlet" involving cats on my channel, if anybody is interested to see. Please be gentle, it's my first time (at trying to make a video!) 💕

[@martinezgerard]

Amazing!

[@IanZainea1990]

i didn't realize they did the scalloped multi-colored paper that long ago. Very cool. .... Also.... I kinda like to think of shakespeare as soap operas are seen today. Rapidly cranked out, quickly memorized and staged. Etc.

[@Charliefarley170287]

Am I the only one who sees an old book and thinks “I bet that smells lovely!”?

[@s.p.8803]

In case you didn't see, they said early it really doesn't.

[@smadaf]

Maybe "G" means that the person thought it was Good. Maybe it means the person saw it at the Globe.

[@ilmelangolo]

nice!

[@jules.bear75]

I love her accent :)

[@TinganHamada86]

Hello kita hadir nonton

[@donlitos]

8:07 John Jones must have been really rich to own a cellphone in 1860

[@Jeffhowardmeade]

Even medieval saints had them. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File%3AMarcantonio_Bassetti_-_St_Antony_Reading_-_WGA01483.jpg

[@vamuseum]

@@Jeffhowardmeade Ahead of their time

[@treasurechest123]

Very good eye! Thanks for the laugh.

[@weeweegordy]

I've always found the portrait in the first folio to be creepy. Like he's wearing a mask.

[@nokomarie1963]

Huh, I wonder if the mysterious "G" indicates that one person bore a part in all these plays. Perhaps the fellow who was "old shepherd, father to Perdita." was a favorite actor. The "G" is the same one, at any rate.

[@MrDavidkaplan]

It must mean the play is suitable for children.

[@hellie_el]

❤❤❤❤❤

[@salahrapiea6244]

بدون مسارح الريف او الجوالة فلا قيمة لشكسبير هذا مطلقا .بل قد يتساوا مع ميللر وهيمنجواي ادباء لا مراخذة امريكا

[@d.martin7692]

Can it hurt to use the gloves?

[@s.p.8803]

Oh yes, absolutely.

[@d.martin7692]

@@s.p.8803 - Are we still talking about the folio?

[@s.p.8803]

@@d.martin7692 Nowadays, no professionnal working with old books would wear gloves. Just wash and dry your hands carefully and you're good for a couple of hours. Wearing gloves, on the other hand, diminishes your sense of touch and you risk damaging the paper by crinkling it or tearing it. Gloves are only recommended in case you have to protect your skin from toxic materials used in the past, like lead, for instance.

[@ganh222]

G meaning Great perhaps?

[@maureencullen1008]

This was very interesting....I still think white gloves should be used as it doesn't matter how thoroughly you wash your hands they will continue to produce oils and sweat.These are so precious we should not take any risks that may detrimentally affect them.

[@s.p.8803]

No, gloves are too risky.

[@BuriedTeeth]

I see where youre coming from but you need the tactile feedback in your bare hands to ensure you dont cause damage. I mean, try handling anything with gloves and you'll find you are prone to mishandling, creasing, tearing, dropping, etc.

[@hsmd4533]

White gloves are racist. We need diverse gloves.

[@MrDavidkaplan]

Really, if you tried to handle the fragile pages of a book from the 17th or 18th century using gloves, you would notice how dangerous it feels - as if any you're going to tear the paper accidentally with every move.

[@frontenac5083]

You're still wrong, then.

[@jeffkeith637]

How do I love thine videos? Shedloads.

[@jerkchickenblog]

count the ways

[@nickcurry77]

This comment section is so peaceful

[@heatherapriest]

This would be so much more enjoyable without the background music

[@davidadams6863]

❤

[@kencur9690]

Disappointing. Suggest changes to script. Here is an initial rough draft, embellishment may be made: “Whaaaaat’s up guys! We’re here with another unboxing, this time it’s my main man... the Shaking Spear of literature... Mr. Williaaaam Shakespeare! That’s right guys, we’re going to unbox the folio of my favourite literary bro tooo-day. I promised you guys I had something big lined up for you in my last video (link in the description) and the time has come... let the unboxing begin.... but before we go on don’t forget to press that like button and ring the bell to subscribe to more tasty unboxings of great literature.”

[@donlitos]

How much ado about nothing? $2-3M

[@IanZainea1990]

Maybe the "G" is for "good" lol

[@pippipster6767]

Did you get that from Amazon?😂

[@amyfrosty]

Are we still asking why they aren’t wearing gloves in these videos?! Jesus the people who audit V&A’s KZbin comments must be absolutely sick of you all. Please go & educate yourself regarding the handling of paper objects in museums before you comment something so ignorant. She even explains it in this video 🙃🙃

[@frontenac5083]

Very well said. I am sick and tired of the white glove brigade myself. I can't imagine being a professional working with old books and seeing these comments all the time. I would simply delete them if I can, I think. Idiots are draining.

[@Jeffhowardmeade]

​@@frontenac5083Sick of the white glove brigade? What have you got against Mickey Mouse?

[@AnnDrogyne]

I wondered why she wasn't wearing gloves. What I'd give to touch that book!

[@rstritmatter]

It deserves to be noted that major scholars, since the 19th century, have insisted that the two epistles with Hemings and Condell's name subscribed to them are actually written by Ben Jonson.

[@Jeffhowardmeade]

It also deserves to be noted that by 1621, Heminges and Condell had spent a couple of decades performing Ben Jonson's writing. Would anyone be surprised that it might have rubbed off, the way Marlowe's language rubbed off on Shakespeare?

[@rstritmatter]

@@Jeffhowardmeade It also deserves to be noted that this is not a serious reply to my comment. I'm talking about scholars like Malone, Steveens, Gregg and others. They did a serious study of the question and produced evidence, which has never been countered by their orthodox brethren. Instead, since their conclusion was inconvenient, their findings are ignored or excluded from literature survey, and then anonymous trolls, who have not read the evidence, go around the internet posting fud like this. No one with any actual familiarity with the evidence and interest in preserving their own credibility would ruin their reputation with a comment like this, so I guess that helps explain why "Coriolanus" must use a pseudonym.

[@Jeffhowardmeade]

@@rstritmatter I get that you are in mental decline, which is why you don't recall the half dozen times I told you my name. Will one more time help? There's nothing inconvenient about Ben Jonson composing To The Great Variety of Readers, if indeed he did. He was obviously an integral part of the project. What's inconvenient is that he identified Shakespeare as being the man from Stratford. For you. So you have to claim he (and everyone else) was lying.

[@rstritmatter]

@@Jeffhowardmeade I get if that you think that every time I mention your use of a pseudonym you think I've forgotten that your are a regular user of sock puppets, sometimes posting under your real name "Jeff Meade" and at other times taking on the name of a character who in Shakespeare ends up betraying the concept of honor by attacking and sacking his homeland. This makes a lot of sense to me. It also makes sense that you have to use your pseudonym when you get personal by making wild claims about the mental capacity of your critics and thereby showing yourself for a rude, small-minded bastard who long ago lost touch with reality. It must be much easier to do that when you're wearing a mask. As for your argument that "there's nothing inconvenient" about Ben Jonson writing things in the First Folio that have the names of the players attached to them," well, that's just wishful thinking. Jonson liked to be remembered as "honest Ben," but his followers remembered him as that "prince of numbers, who doth in numbers lie." According to you, he must have been lying. According to post-Stratfordians like Elizabeth Winkler (www.amazon.com/Shakespeare-Was-Woman-Other-Heresies/dp/198217126X/ref=sr_1_1?crid=36IWDRA7Y3861&keywords=winkler+shakespeare&qid=1683033943&sprefix=winkler+shakespeare%2Caps%2C80&sr=8-1), he was doing what he did best.

[@Jeffhowardmeade]

​@@rstritmatterSince we have now established that you can remember my name and that I'm not hiding it behind a pseudonym, but rather using a frikken username, you can stop whining about it. Since I'm retired and you can't go crying to my boss about how mean I'm being, what bloody good does my name do you, anyway?

[@jasonquinlan731]

Could I borrow it?🤪

[@billyhendrix5544]

Do you ever wonder if they called him Bill?

[@s.p.8803]

Nah, Bill first appeared in the 19th century.

[@billyhendrix5544]

@@s.p.8803 People always ask me how they get bill from William. You got any idea?

[@s.p.8803]

@@billyhendrix5544 Basically, when I studied English ancient names and words, I remember learning some letters were switched at some point in the Middle Age (although it was not really in use until much later), like Dick for Richard; it was unformal language, but no one really knows why.

[@Nullifidian]

Will was the accepted shortening of William in the early modern era. And they probably did call him "Will", because he puns on his own nickname in Sonnets #135 and #136.

[@cristinadistefano2880]

Where are the gloves????

[@s.p.8803]

In a mythical world, where they belong.

[@frontenac5083]

In your mum's back passage.

[@smadaf]

Remember: every video needs a musical score. 😒

[@jeffbabies7428]

Love your videos, but I have to strongly disagree with the statement that Baz Luhrmann’s adaptation of Romeo & Juliet was faithful to the text. That movie is notorious for cutting material which no longer jived with the modernization of the setting and story-most notably the jarring decision to completely remove Juliet’s final words, simply because they were using a gun instead of a dagger. To remove text-and more importantly to remove the poetry and avoid symbolism simply because you need to make things more literal for your audience-is the very definition of betraying the text.

[@ThreadBomb]

Shakespeare's plays have often been cut for performance, for centuries now. You can easily trim a four play and only a few experts might notice.

[@katheryns1219]

Yes, I agree, Jeff. The point of the play, which is stated CLEARLY in the prologue, is that Romeo and Juliet's deaths have been arranged by the stars to heal the family feud which has once again broken "to new mutiny." They left that out of the Baz Luhrmann film. So instead, it was a simple and pointless suicide. In the 1968 version, Zeferelli shows the families getting together afterwards. My main objection to that film is putting the guys in ballet slippers. I was riding the bus home one day after Baz's version came out and heard a teenage couple talking about the film which they'd recently seen. The girl said (imagine a Valley Girl accent) "Yeah, I really liked it - except for the words." A Shakespeare play can certainly be edited, but once you remove the karmic structure, it is broken.

[@Twentythousandlps]

@@katheryns1219 The Valley Girl on the bus was saying what half the audience and most of the stage directors think. From the mouths of babes.

[@lexiirrose1655]

hehe Thomas Poope

[@peapod8]

A lot of controversy swirls about this volume and the Stratford man himself. What these fine ladies tell us should be taken with a grain of salt. Hugely.