To begin I would like to apologize for taking another break in the blog. I've been working on another writing project, one that you'll be able to watch on your magic internet devices in early 2012. It's a really exciting project, and it even ties back in to BookWorld, and I'll be updating about it here as it gets closer to realization.
As I return to this world I thought I would end the suspense from this previous post*, and present Shakespearian Pet Peeves numbers 4 and 5. I'm so kind, the two people moderately interested in this information are going to be pleased. I decided to combine these two since they don't really warrant an entire post each, but they still fill me with a significant amount of Bard-Nerd rage.
So with out further ado-
BookWench's Shakespearian Pet Peeve # 5 –
So this exists-
I understand the business logic- people will pay money for ANYTHING (seriously, anything) provided it says Twilight, Edward, Bella, or Jacob, or if it has the now distinct black, red, and white cover design and font style seen above. And I wasn't that upset when the co-opted Wuthering Heights since both books involve overbearing, controlling men and the women who are slavishly devoted to them, unconcerned with whomever else they hurt along the way. (I told you I had some Bronte issues.) But when you go for my Romeo and Juliet, I'm going to have some issues.
The only way this becomes okay with me is if you retroactively make the main characters of Twilight kill themselves in the same number of pages given to Romeo and Juliet. (Though that almost seems too nice and quick, as I would like them to die slowly, preferably at my hands.**)
Seriously Twi-hards, you make my book retail life miserable enough, leave the things I love alone.
BookWench's Shakespearian Pet Peeve #5 -
“Why isn't Shakespeare in non-fiction with the other history books?”
I'm sorry foolish customer, but the PLAY about the deposed duke who becomes a wizard and lives on a magical island and controls the spirits there is not a history book. It's a make pretend story. And I know it's written in “that old-timey language,”*** but it's still not a history book.
Even the History Plays aren't a very factual account of what happened. Shakespeare was writing revisionist history to please the monarch currently on the throne, partly because he needed aristocratic patronage, but also because he liked his head firmly attached to his body. So Richard III gets a made-up hunchback and an extra veneer of evil because his defeat allowed the Tudor (and later Stuart) dynasties to exist. So no matter how you slice it Shakespeare does not belong on a shelf with meticulously researched, very dense tomes about the actual history of England. We don't keep Sophocles over there either, and his plays are even older than Bill's.****
So there you go – two more Shakespearian Pet Peeves (and a Bronte/Twilight peevish bonus!) shared with the world (i.e. the 10 of you who read this blog.) I'm saving the last two for days when I've had more to drink so I don't die of a rage stroke on my keyboard. Seriously, I've hung up on people, left the room, and yelled at the TV for things related to the top two, unforgivable Shakespeare transgressions.
*Now edited to include a picture of one of the dumbest tattoos ever.
**Yes, I am aware I cannot actually murder fictional characters. But I really want to. Having said that I am probably now on some sort of Twilight enemies list. Someone will find me dead with Team Edward Forever written in my blood next to my dead body.
***Actual customer quote
****That's right, we have a friendly nickname-y relationship.