Anglofiles #122
04-03-05

| Redaktionel note | Macbeth for the Masses | Shakespeare-selskabet |
| Formandens beretning 2001 | Sommereksamen 2001 | Indholdsfortegnelse |
TEMA:
Shakespeare
a a a a a a
a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a
a a a
Hvorfor
et temanummer om dramatikeren
Niels
Bugge Hansens situationsrapport fra
I
forlængelse af Niels Bugges artikel gør Kiernan Ryan op med såvel
nyhistorisme
De
to teoretiske indlæg om Hamlet har vidt forskellige udgangspunkter. Ulla
Hjertings
Efter
at have opregnet 13 eksempler på mindre end eksemplariske fædre i Shakespeares
Herefter
foretager Lars Kaaber en læsning
Michael
Pettitts encyklopædiske tilgang til Shakespeare tager udgangspunkt i to
Vi
har bedt formanden for Det Danske Shakespeareselskab om at præsentere det
Endelig
bringer vi to artikler, som direkte
Jeff
Wood spørger, hvorfor ikke alle engelsklærere
Den
anden direkte undervisningsrelevante
Vi
håber artiklerne vil både gavne og fornøje.
Redaktionen.
FRA
BESTYRELSE
OG
UDVALG
a a a a a a
a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a
a a a
Af
Gitte Vest Barkholt, formand for Engelsklærerforeningen
Så
er tiden atter kommet til det tidspunkt,
Året
har været forholdsvis stille. De fleste sager,
som bestyrelsen har haft med at
Fagligt
udvalg har i den seneste tid arbejdet med
nogle planer om også at få gang i
Regionerne
Alt
dette arbejde kunne ikke eksistere og
Kurserne
I
samarbejde med Fagligt Udvalg udbyder Foreningen hvert år omkring 25
efteruddannelseskurser, idet hver region bliver
Sidste
år deltog 533 medlemmer i vores
I
dette forår havde vi udbudt 12 kurser,
Her
i efteråret har vi også måttet aflyse nogle regionale kurser og der synes at
tegne
Heldigvis
har de afholdte udlandskurser haft fin søgning, hvilket selvfølgelig er glædeligt.
Forskellige
kolleger har påpeget det uheldige i, at de fleste udlandskurser ligger lige i
GymSprog
Gymsprog
er en sammenslutning af de
Hvad
det nye år vil bringe af nye udfordringer for Gymsprog kommer på dagsordenen
Kassererens
bemærkninger
Der
er i alt 1506 medlemmer i skrivende
Som
tidligere år er det stadig sådan at alt
Foreningens
økonomiske situation er sund. Vi har haft et par kurser i år, der har
For
at imødekomme lignende situationer foreslår kassereren at kontingentet for
2002
Opkrævninger
vil blive sendt til medlemmerne
HF-udvalget
På
generalforsamlingen i januar blev HF-udvalget formeret igen, og på trods af
stor
IT-udvalg
I 2001 har IT-udvalget videreført sit arbejde
med fagets IT-side. I lighed med tidligere år har det været vanskeligt at finde datoer, hvor udvalgets medlemmer kunne mødes rent fysisk, ikke mindst på grund af den store geografiske spredning blandt medlemmerne, men der er hele tiden ført en udbytterig e-mail korrespondance om forskellige IT-emner relateret til engelskundervisning.Selv om årets IT-efteruddannelseskursus
er blevet aflyst, mener udvalget dog, at der fortsat er behov for kurser, og der er drøftet planer for kursus i 2002. Også i den forbindelse vil den praktiske anvendelighed af det indlærte stof på kurset blive prioriteret, idet der fortsat er enighed om, at der er et stort, udækket behov blandt kolleger for at få kvalifikationer i almindelig anvendelse af mulighederne for anvendelse af IT i undervisningen.Anglo files
I indeværende år er Anglo files udkommet
med 4 numre som planlagt med temaerne Skotland/keltisk islæt (#119), Teaching the Classics (#120), Eksamen (#121) og endelig indeværende nummer Shakespeare (#122). Egentlig skulle Shakespeare stoffet have været inkluderet i Teaching the Classics, men på grund af overvældende stofmængder fik Shakespeare et nummer for sig selv. Redaktionen har fået et nyt medlem, Bjarne Albrechtsen, Hobro, så den tæller igen fire medlemmer. Temaerne for næste årgang er endnu ikke endegyldigt fastlagt, men redaktionen pønser på et tema om moderne tendenser i litteratur og muligvis et tema om film i undervisningen.Indkaldelse
til generalforsamling
Der
indkaldes til generalforsamling i Engelsklærerforeningen for Gymnasiet og HF
fredag
Dagsorden
ifølge vedtægterne. Sager, der ønskes optaget på dagsordenen, skal være
formanden i hænde senest 4 uger før generalforsamlingen.
Der
er 3 bestyrelsesmedlemmer på valg: Mette Weisberg, Stig Lægdsgaard Madsen,
Ruth Hjorth-Nielsen. Alle er villige til genvalg. Anne Kirsten Pettitt er ikke på
valg, men ønsker at
Udover
4 medlemmer til bestyrelsen skal der også vælges 2 suppleanter.
Forslag
til kandidater skal være bestyrelsen i hænde senest 4 uger før
generalforsamlingen.
På
bestyrelsens vegne
Gitte
Vest Barkholt
Evaluering af sommereksamen 2001
Ved en fejl kom nedenstående evaluering af den mundtlige sommereksamen 2001
ikke med i det netop udsendte oktobernummer af Anglofiles.
Artiklen hører sammen med listen over læste romaner, som er trykt i bladet.
Med venlig hilsen
Elsebeth Gabel Austin
fagkonsulent
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mundtlig eksamen, sommer 2001
af Elsebeth Gabel Austin, fagkonsulent
Den mundtlige sommereksamen 2001 er veloverstået. Den traditionelle optakt til
mundtlig eksamen i form af pensumindberetning er et meget nyttigt instrument til
at få et billede at engelskfagets indhold på landsplan. I lyset af, at
kernefagligheden er sat på dagsordenen, blev pensumcheckerne og jeg i år
derfor enige om, at foretage en landsdækkende undersøgelse af, hvilke romaner,
der læses i faget engelsk i gymnasiet og på hf. Det er der kommet en meget
lang og meget interessant oversigt ud af, som offentliggøres her i bladet som
en særskilt artikel.
Pensumskemaerne
Det kan ikke gentages for tit, at en præcis, letlæselig udfyldning af
pensumskemaerne er af største vigtighed. Selv om det er de færreste, der
stadig skriver pensumskemaerne i hånden, vil jeg alligevel samtidig gøre opmærksom
på, at et håndskrevet skema også skal leve op til kravet om læselighed og
overskuelighed, og at det også skal indeholde de tekstoplysninger, som er nævnt
i pensumvejledningen. Pensumskemaerne er et dokument, som skal kunne læses af
andre end fagkonsulent, pensumcheckere og censorer. Det er her, vi dokumenterer,
at vi overholder gældende bekendtgørelser, og at vi lever op til en ensartet
standard på landsplan.
Der er altså meget vigtigt, at huske at anføre de tekstoplysninger, som er
angivet i vejledningerne til pensumskemaerne, og her er der stadig mange, der
glemmer at anføre 1.udgivelsesår for en tekst. Da kravet om at læse tekster
fra før 1900 er faldet bort på gymnasiets obligatoriske niveauer og erstattet
af "forskellige perioder", er det blevet endnu vigtigere at angive
teksters 1. udgivelsesår for at kunne se, hvilke forskellige perioder tekstlæsningen
har dækket.
Om pensum generelt
Selv om det af nogle kolleger opleves som værende i petitesseafdelingen, skal
det understreges, at det er vigtigt at ramme normalsidetallet for pensum- og
eksamensopgivelserne så tæt på som muligt. En overskridelse på flere sider i
fx eksamenspensum er ikke acceptabel, og når nogle skemaer derfor bliver
returneret med en påtegning om, at man skal reducere sidetallet i
eksamenspensum, er det for at sikre både elevens og lærerens retsstilling og
forhindre eventuelle klagesager.
På det tidspunkt, hvor pensumindberetningerne modtages, kan der naturligvis
ikke gøres så meget ved et alt for stort læsepensum, og det er da heller ikke
ret tit, at der er alvorlige overskridelser her. Et læsepensum på obligatorisk
niveau med 73 læste tekster, hvoraf tre er romaner, hører heldigvis til sjældenhederne,
men det er alligevel en god ide ind imellem at overveje, om elevernes færdigheder
i engelsk udbygges proportionalt med antal læste tekster.
Det sker stadig ind imellem, at forord fra danske antologier, skrevet af
danske kolleger, anføres i læse- og eksamenspensum. Når den type tekster ikke
kan tælle med i læse- eller eksamenspensum, er det fordi de er pædagogisk
bearbejdet, da de henvender sig til danske elever.
Om mundtlig eksamen og adgang til hjælpemidler
Efter indførelse af de nye bestemmelser om tilladte hjælpemidler ved mundtlig
eksamen i gymnasiet, hvor eksaminanderne i forberedelsestiden må have alle
faglige hjælpemidler efter eget valg til rådighed, opstår der somme tider
tvivl om, hvad dette nu helt præcist indebærer og også om, hvordan man så
under eksaminationen bedst prøver eksaminanden i den detaljerede tekstforståelse.
I april 2000 blev der udsendt en ny vejledning for mundtlig eksamen i engelsk,
og heri er der afsnit, der omhandler netop disse spørgsmål. Vejledningen kan læses
her. .
Desuden skal jeg minde om, at hf ved mundtlig eksamen i engelsk følger
fagbilaget fra 1995, hvilket betyder, at der ved mundtlig eksamen på hf-fællesfag
og på hf-tilvalg stadig gælder gamle regler i forbindelse med adgang til hjælpemidler.
I sin nuværende skikkelse har Det Danske Shakespeare Selskab eksisteret siden 1962, men vi kan spore vore aner tilbage til det 19. århundrede. Da jeg blev bedt om at skrive noget om selskabet til ANGLO files, benyttede jeg, som nyligt konstitueret formand, lejligheden til at grave lidt i selskabets arkiver for de senere år. Her fandt jeg Love for ”Det Danske Shakespeare Selskab”, som indeholder følgende enkle formålsparagraf: ”Selskabets formål er at udbrede kendskab til og forståelse af Shakespeares værker.” En sammenligning mellem målsætning og praksis viser, at vi stadig lever ganske godt op til, hvad røsten fra fortiden forpligter os til. Vi fungerer som et mødested for mennesker med interesse for Shakespeare og de værker, han har skrevet. Vi beskæftiger os med hans stykker både set i sammenhæng med hans samtid, og som de optræder på nutidens scener, her og i udlandet. Selskabet arrangerer foredrag af litterært eller teaterhistorisk tilsnit såvel som møder med udøvende kunstnere, der aktuelt arbejder med Shakespeare. Hertil kommer også filmaftener og teaterbesøg. Vi henvender os til alle, der har lyst til at beskæftige sig med Shakespeare i selskab med andre med samme tilbøjeligheder. Selskabets nuværende medlemsskare består af en alsidig blanding af mennesker, der beskæftiger sig professionelt med litteratur og teater, og mennesker, hvis daglige virke drejer sig om helt andre ting, men som netop derfor kan bidrage med friske synspunkter på forfatteren og hans værker.
At vi ikke – i ordenes mest støvede forstand – er et lærd eller akademisk selskab, afholder os på ingen måde fra at følge med i, hvad der rører sig i den kritiske og teater- og litteraturteoretiske debat både herhjemme og ude i den store verden. Et tema, som i den senere tid har trængt sig på, er den hjemlige debat om ejerskabet til Shakespeare. I den forbindelse har vi haft besøg af Erik A. Nielsen, som sammen med Lars Liebst har skrevet bogen Hvem ejer Shakespeare. I den rejses spørgsmålet om, hvor meget man i en teateropsætning kan tillade sig at pille ved Shakespeares tekst (noget som en anden af stridens fremtrædende kombattanter, Bettina Heltberg, har haft meget bestemte meninger om i sine teateranmeldelser). Samme tema har stukket hovedet frem på en række af vore andre møder i de seneste sæsoner, ikke mindst i forbindelse Romeo og Julie på Østre Gasværk og Gladsaxe Teaters Shakespeare-sæson. Som en introduktion til denne besøgte Flemming Enevold på hans teater, hvor han indviede os i de betragtninger, der lå bag ideen om at præsentere tre så markante og markant forskellige bearbejdelser af Shakespeare. Især fik vi selvfølgelig et grundigt indblik i arbejdsprocessen bag hans egen opsætning af En Skærsommernatsdrøm.
PÅ den mere teoretiske front har Jens Aage Doctor præsenteret sin Bakhtin-inspirerede, karnevalistiske læsning af Shakespeare i selskabet, og Claus Bratt Østergaard har udlagt sin nominalistiske tilgang til Shakespeares tekster. Terence Hawkes har givet os et eksempel på, hvordan man forholder sig til Shakespeare og receptionen af hans værker blandt repræsentanter for de britisk-amerikanske tveæggede litteraturteoretiske tvillinger Cultural Materialism og New Historicism. En anden af vore gæster, Peter Thomson, er en forsker, som i sine bøger og artikler har været med til opbygge den fond af viden som danner baggrund for rekonstruktionen af The Globe, og til at befrugte forsøget på at finde en måde at spille Shakespeare på i spændingsfeltet mellem det teaterarkæologiske og det nutidige.
Tidligere sæsoner har endvidere budt på aftener med inden- og udenlandske Shakespeare-eksperter som f.eks. Niels Bugge Hansen, Tom Pettitt, Rebecca Flynn, Martin Butler, Patrick Spottiswoode og Kristian Smidt. Vi har haft besøg af oversættere som Stig Albrechtsen og Niels Brunse og kritikere som Jens Kistrup og Ole Nørlyng. I sin dobbeltrolle som universitetslektor og dramaturg har Bent Holm vist, hvordan det er muligt at forene den akademiske synsvinkel med praktiske teatererfaringer. Vi har set Shakespeare anskuet som kristen modernist, fået indblik i brugen af Shakespeare i psykoterapeutisk sammenhæng, og bevæget os ud i randområder som Shakespeare og musikken, operaen eller balletten. Vi har selvfølgelig også i høj grad beskæftiget os med Shakespeare på film og video.
Selskabet har haft arrangementer i forbindelse med opførelser både på de etablerede københavnske teatre og på de mere eksperimenterende scener. Vi har mødt instruktører som Eyun Johannessen, Peter Langdal, Jan Maagaard og Klaus Hoffmeyer, og skuespillere som Gerz Feigenberg, Jesper Christensen og Ole Thestrup. På Kaleidoskop, KUA, Rialto Teatret, Krudttønden og Terra Nova Teatret, har vi haft lejlighed til at se de i Danmark sjældent opførte stykker Coriolanus (både i stykkets første danske opførelse i Christian Søllings instruktion, og som one-woman-show i Lene Vestergård og Vigga Bros genfortælling), Cymbeline, Love’s Labour’s Lost (før Det Kongelige Teater tog det op) og Hamlet (”The bad quarto”, vel at mærke), og – bestemt ikke at forglemme - Shakespeare musicalen Where There’s a Will. I forbindelse med en række af disse opførelser har vi haft lejlighed til at tale med instruktør og skuespillere om deres arbejde med stykket.
Som eksempel på et sæsonforløb kan tages den netop afsluttede sæson. Vi har i den haft besøg af den nye leder af The Shakespeare Institute i Stratford, Peter Holland, som med udgangspunkt i sin rolle som bestyrelsesmedlem af The Royal Shakespeare Company fortalte om den organisatoriske og økonomiske baggrund for at spille Shakespeare i dagens England. Vi har diskuteret Tony Richardsons skuespillercentrerede og nærbilledrige Hamlet film og Christine Edzards feministiske og antiromantiske filmatisering af As You Like It. Niels Brunse har trin for trin taget os med gennem den proces, der førte frem til hans oversættelse af Antony and Cleopatra til Det Kongelige Teater. En oversættelse som dernæst i nært samarbejde med instruktøren Klaus Hoffmeyer blev modificeret til den tekst vi siden har kunnet høre fra teatrets scene. Lars Kaaber har med udgangspunkt i sin nyligt udkomne bog Kærlighedens komedier talt om mænd og kvinder i kærlighedens og komediens vold. Jeg har selv talt om engelske Shakespeare-bearbejdelser 1660-1850. Vi har beskæftiget os med skuespillet Edward III på et møde, hvor vi med fokus på ”grevinde-scenerne” gennem oplæsning og livlig diskussion afprøvede berettigelsen af de bestræbelser, som i disse år gøres på at få optaget dette stykke i det gode selskab af kanoniske Shakespeare tekster. Endelig fejrede vi Shakespeares fødselsdag i selskab med Kasper Holten. Ovennævnte Shakespeare sæson på Gladsaxe gav os lejlighed til at se hans opsætning af Price-brødrenes musical version af Trold kan tæmmes. Nu fik vi mulighed for at høre ham fortælle om denne forestilling og – især - om sin kontroversielle, men Reumertpris-vindende, opsætning af Hamlet på Aalborg Teater.
Yderligere oplysninger kan får ved henvendelse til vores sekretær Allan Findlay, Blindestræde 9, 4300 Holbæk, Tlf: 5943 2991, eller til mig på e-mail adressen: omoe@hum.ku.dk
Det danske Shakespeare-selskab (1961)
Formand: Cand.mag. Søs Haugaard
Østerbrogade 144 3.th., 2100 København Ø.
Tlf. 35 38 38 65
Judith Darling has taught English,
and at times Latin, at Garner Senior High School, North Carolina, since January
of 1990. A 1989 graduate and Valedictorian of NCSU, she chose the profession
later in life, after a brief career with a utility company and then a longer
career raising four children. In 1996, she served as the state's Outstanding
English Teacher and as Wake County Teacher of the Year. More recently, she was
recognized as Wake Co.'s Outstanding Teacher of the Gifted and won the Katherine
& Robert Sawyer Teaching Award for her work with Duke's Talent
Identification Program. She brings to the classroom a deep concern for
disadvantaged and disillusioned young people, gained from her own difficult
experiences growing up in Boston's inner city. With them, as well as with her
Advanced Placement students, she thoroughly enjoys sharing the wisdom of
literature and the power of language. She believes, with Christa McAuliffe, that
to teach is to touch the future, and the future needs a very special touch.
"Macbeth for the Masses:
Presenting the Play to Reluctant Readers"
All we who teach English hold the language of Shakespeare in some kind of high and holy regard, but truly the bard endures primarily because his themes are timeless. This assertion needs no evidence, yet its ready affirmation lies in producers’ efforts to set these plays in times out of their time. The plays are great stories that appeal to every generation because every generation produces the same heroes and villains, and are fascinated with the same moral predicaments and social faux pas. In fact, Shakespeare reached into his own past for the plot of his plays. His treatments were certainly original, but the stories followed the archetypal patterns of experience that exemplify the human condition in any age.
So why does it seem more difficult with each age to make the matter of Shakespeare’s plays clearer to our students in the classroom, in spite of his growing popularity on the movie screen? Primarily because the language, while beautiful to the ears of the esoteric, becomes more and more archaic to our students with each passing year. Yet many English teachers will not surrender the language. For them, to bypass or paraphrase the old English is to violate something sacred. The implicit message to students is that unless they gain the reading skill needed to understand a language over 400 years old, they will not understand the story. In fact, insidiously many students hear an additional message ~ that they, because of their academic limitations, are not even worthy of the story.
But story matters more than sound and rhythm. The euphony of any language in any age was crafted to serve the significance of the story first. The pragmatic populations in our public schools do respond to and appreciate the sound of their own pop culture music, but even that medium must have its message before teens invest their money and energy into it. All of us crave story; indeed Reynolds Price points out that man has lived without many things, but story is not one of them. If a teacher believes that students need story, and that Shakespeare’s stories are among the best, then the language ‘barrier’ must be mitigated through practical classroom activities, video support, and modern readings that are thematically related.
Macbeth is the Shakespeare play most often taught to high school seniors in the United States, maybe because its brevity is, to the students’ way of thinking, one of its better features. But from a pragmatic perspective, Macbeth is also one of the more relevant and accessible of the plays, particularly of the tragedies. Students may not identify well with the brooding of Hamlet; today’s moral judgments are, for them, quick and practical. Nor do they tend to identify with King Lear’s inept parenting. But Macbeth’s warrior status, his meteoric rise, and his swift, sensational fall all provide great appeal to teenage readers. Also Roman Polanski’s fine film production of 1971 holds student interest quite well.
Approaching Macbeth with reluctant or resistant students calls for some non-traditional strategies while still following a sound pedagogical basis. That is to say, teachers need to pique interest before reading, provide structure while reading, and culminating activities that guide students to a rich understanding after the reading is completed, the kind of understanding that makes the play relevant to students’ lives and leaves a lasting effect upon both their appreciation of the play’s message and Shakespeare’s genius. What follows are a number of active strategies to teach Macbeth to high school students who might rather be reading comics or watching television. The strategies incorporate a good deal of Multiple Intelligence theory from Howard Gardner’s work in alternative learning styles as well as some activities aligned to Marzano’s Dimensions of Learning, a thinking model a little similar to Bloom’s Taxonomy.
Piquing interest: Here are two ways to introduce the play at the beginning of the unit. Both use small sections of the text and encourage students to speculate on what the words mean or on what might have come before or after the selected passage. These kinds of activities are called DRTA’s – Directed Reading~Thinking Activities.
1. Take apart a copy of the play and hang or tape the pages around the room. Send the students on a mission to find three particularly intriguing, interesting, or baffling lines from the pages. They should walk about the room reading a line here or there randomly, and then write down the lines they select. Allot a predetermined amount of time for the task, and when the time is up, reassemble the students. Call upon each student to share one of the three with the rest of the class and explain what interested him in the quote. By sharing just one of three, the student can select a quote that someone else has not already selected and shared. The activity culminates with students aware of a number of issues, intrigues, and questions on their minds.
2. Divide the class into groups of three to four students each. Select particularly strong lines of high interest and suspense, as many as you might have groups of students. Here are some suggestions:
“Come thick night
And pall thee in the dunnest smoke of hell,
That my keen knife see not the wound it makes” (I.V.49-51).
“Is this a dagger which I see before me,
The handle towards my hand?” (II.i.33-34).
“My Lord, his throat is cut: that I did for him” (III.iv.15).
“They have tied me to the stake; I cannot fly,
But bear-like I must fight the course” (V.vii.1-2).
Give each group one line only, preferably written down on a piece of paper. Direct the group to write a short, dramatic skit that involves each group member and that culminates with the line they have been given. I usually give additional guidelines such as the scene should be bloody, violent, active, and intense. As they work together to produce the skit, the teacher might circulate among them to give guidance and suggestions. After a reasonable amount of time, each group should present their skit to the class. Everyone knows that the final line of each skit is a line from Macbeth, so this activity serves to preview the action to come, but in an intriguing way. Students respond with high interest when any of the lines are encountered later in their proper context.
Another prereading strategy that
provides a good beginning to any work, especially a difficult text like
Shakespeare, is called Story Circles. There
are many variations on the idea of Story Circles, but basically, the teacher
makes placards or signs for each significant character in the story.
He then selects a student to represent each character.
The student would sit at the front of the classroom with the sign while
the teacher identified the chief characteristics or actions of each character,
not so the story is already told through the introduction, but so that enough
information is given to assist students in remembering the character through the
beginning of the story. Students
manage the remembering better if they can visually link a face with the
characteristics.
Structure while Reading: Plays
were not written to be read, but to be viewed.
Therefore, it would make sense that more structure is needed when guiding
students to understand a play. What
follows are suggestions for reading, responding, writing, and viewing as
students move through the play.
Video: Far too often in schools, students view a literary video all in one sitting, or over two or three days with no other activities in between. This rapid delivery may work for their pop culture movies, but does little justice to the richness of theme and language in Shakespeare or other works of literary merit. Rather, video, in particular a Shakespeare video, should be viewed in short sections, perhaps no more than 15 to 20 minutes, or in one-act intervals. I always use the Roman Polanski version. (I tried the Orson Welles 1947 version just once, for about 15 minutes. The subtleties of this black and white classic were less than appreciated by my students.) After the DRTA’s, students are fairly prepared to begin viewing, but I also use a laser pointer to draw their attention to the images on the screen lest they miss them. For example, they may not completely understand the significance of the dagger’s handle in Act II, or the verbal allusions to the messenger’s pale face in V.iii. Also, Polanski has several sight gags that reinforce the action, sometimes for a humorous effect, as during the porter’s scene. So the video is more effective in small segments to reinforce other class activities. In this way, the video stays in a support role and permits the teacher to do justice to the text while challenging students to interpret the literary devices and appreciate the poetry of the lines. Class does not descend into merely ‘seeing the movie’ but rather the movie becomes a small and yet still significant part of the reading and learning experience.
Journals: Like video, journals, too, often suffer from misuse or poor use. When students write, they need not merely report on what they know. Carefully written journal prompts give students an opportunity to explore in writing just the opposite – what they do not know. Ample research in the field of Writing to Learn demonstrates over and again that the act of writing helps students to navigate abstract material, make meaning of facts and details, and express problems of understanding. Therefore, time writing is time learning. Maybe there are times and places for the infamous ‘free write’ where students are given a set amount of time to write whatever is on their mind. But in the context of reading literary works, journal time is well spent if the teacher writes a sustained series of exploratory prompts. While reading Macbeth, journal prompts should ground students into introspective reflections on the problems encountered by the hero while giving students an opportunity to look at similar problems in their own lives or the lives of those close to them. Prompts could include a line or two from the play for close analysis, so that students experience the challenge of identifying a particular metaphor and seeing what the effect of that metaphor might be upon the tone of the play. The prompts might also give the students an aphorism to link to the play, or just merely be a personal question that places the student in the metaphysical world of the play. Here are a few journal prompts that I have used in the past.
•
How do you determine which path to follow in your own life? Why do you
think we “fall alone?” Or: Why do you think we don’t “fall alone?”
•
“Man is the only creature that strives to surpass himself, and
yearns for the impossible” What seemingly ‘impossible’ thing does Macbeth
yearn for? What would he give to get it?
•
“Half the truth is often a great lie.”
Which half is usually omitted? When did you last receive a half truth?
(Hint: Advertisements?) What
happened when you were told one of these ‘great lies’?
Explain which half of the truth the witches omitted in their prophecy to
Macbeth.
•
“Good character is like a rubber ball - Thrown down hard, it bounces
right back;
Good reputation
is like a crystal ball - Thrown for gain, shattered and cracked.” What is the
difference between character and reputation?
Find instances in the play when Macbeth threw down his character and his
reputation. What happened in each
case?
Modern
readings: Students do read. They
select modern texts of high interest to them, usually culled from pop magazines
and student publications. Teachers
may find that similar themes and issues are there in those teen texts, and they
might do well to pull some of those texts into their discussions and class
presentations on the play. I bring
in editorials on political ambition, stories about deception and treachery in
the government, feature articles on unusual natural phenomena, and especially
interesting to students, stories on modern Wicca or witchcraft.
These articles enrich the experience of reading Macbeth in two ways.
First, these articles are easier to read and give students a respite from
the complex Elizabethan prose. Secondly,
the subject matter in these articles confirm to the student that Macbeth is,
indeed, a relevant work.
Art
work: Struggling students often
need a picture of what is happening in the text, which is why they would rather
see the movie than read the play. There
are a few ways to meet this need for visuals while still keeping students
grounded in the text. One way
involves the use of paintings either from a textbook or from the art
transparencies provided by textbook publishers in the ancillary materials.
These paintings provide structure for discussion as well as opportunities
for divergent thinking if they are used in conjunction with careful questioning
that encourages the student to connect the painting with the text.
I usually ask what I call a ‘synectic’ question that goes something
like this: How is [identify a
character, a mood, or a moment from the text] like [identify some element of the
painting, either shape, color, composition]?
This synectic strategy creates a very incongruent connection between an
abstract in the play and the concrete of the painting.
Here’s a clearer example using Dali’s famous
“Persistence of Memory.” Present
the painting to the class, and ask “How is Macbeth’s future like the clocks
in this painting?” Students are,
first of all, fascinated with the picture, and many other surreal pictures that
I use. Then, with some guidance
from the teacher and the freedom to think divergently, the responses become
insightful and interesting.
Another class activity that employs art calls upon students to create their own picture. Divide the class into groups, being sure that at least one person in the group has some ability to draw. Assign a short passage, the same one to every group, and preferably a soliloquy that is rich in imagery. Lady Macbeth’s speech on the battlements of Dunsinane works well, as would Macbeth’s “We have scotched the snake, not killed it” speech. Direct the group to read the passage together, list the images described in the passage, and then, on large sheets of construction paper, sketch or draw the images in some contextual relationship to each other. When all groups are finished, each group should explain their pictorial rendition of the words. No doubt, each group will have selected to emphasize certain images over others. As they share their pictures, the teacher can direct their understanding for why Shakespeare used certain images and which images figure more strongly than others. This activity also gives students a chance to see what they missed in their reading or what they overemphasized. This strategy is very popular with my students, and they feel they learn much about close and careful reading through the drawing and sketching.
Multiple Choice Questions: The ability to solve the multiple-choice question matters much to our students. They encounter these kinds of questions constantly in all standardized tests, from high school exit to college entrance exams. Unfortunately, students do not practice with the MC format enough to understand where their thinking errors are, nor do they get the feedback they need to correct themselves. If teachers would use MC questions to teach, not assess, students could have a non-punitive, safe zone in which to practice important thinking skills. Note, though, that not all MC questions are written to the same standard of difficulty. I use those of the SAT quality that require students to read very carefully and use the higher levels of thinking. For example, MC questions that merely ask students to recall actual events from the play measure only their ability to recall facts. The superior MC question asks why a particular character acted a certain way, or what the effect was of a certain metaphor.
An important part of MC activities is that the teacher should ask students to put their answers on a separate answer document. I use an index card and collect it right away. In this way, I can give the students the answers right away, while the questions and their errors are fresh on their minds. They do not have to wait until I correct the answers overnight (or later), by which time the questions, the passage, and the entire activity have become a faint memory.
What follows are five different ways to use MC questions in the classroom while reading a text such as Macbeth.
From least to most challenging…
1. Distribute a passage and questions to all students. Read the passage together, even discuss the passage if appropriate. Then direct students to focus on one question at a time, as a class. Poll the class to see who chose A, B, C, etc. Put the tallies on the blackboard. After all have expressed their choice, ask students to defend their answers, explaining why. Guide the ensuing discussion. As soon as each student has made their selection clear and final, give the correct answer and explain why. Proceed through all questions in the same way.
2. Distribute a passage and questions to all students. Assign students to teams of two and put each team in charge of one question. Guide the reading of the passage. Each team is responsible for selecting the answer and then explaining to the rest of the class their rationale for that answer. After each team has presented their choice and its defense, allow time for students to make their own choices for all questions. Collect the answers and then give the correct responses, checking the rationale against the rationale given by the team with that question.
3. Distribute a passage and questions to all students. Direct students to make their choices carefully, but in addition to the letter choice, they must also write a defense, a rationale, for why they made the choice they did. Collect the answers and then give the correct responses, checking the explanation for the choice against their own explanation.
4. Distribute the question stems without choices or distracters. Direct students to give a written response to the stem, including if the stem says “Which is the best explanation for…,” or “All of the following are in the passage EXCEPT.” (If you need to adjust the stem to accommodate students, do so.) After the students share their answers or after the teacher has reviewed them, reissue the test with stems and choices. Then direct students to make the correct choice.
5. Distribute the question stems and a passage, but do not give any choices or distracters. Direct students to write the distracters. Explain that two of the choices are very closely related and two are tricky but wrong. This activity is challenging and does not usually need follow-up but is sufficient in itself.
Culminating activities: The traditional end-of-text test need not be addressed here; it is ubiquitous, and there are plenty of versions and varieties available. I never use them anymore, anyway, because most of them are primarily written to stress recall of facts. But today, should students need to remember the details of a text, they can retrieve them quite quickly, electronically. I use, instead, a theme-writing session, a reader’s guide, a timed writing, and sometimes an essay that compares the work just read with another comparable work read in the last year.
Theme-writing takes on lasting significance when students realize that works of literary merit, such as Shakespeare, matter because they give us an important message by which to live. However, they often have difficulty figuring out exactly what that message is. Usually, I will take a class period to guide students into deriving a good theme. We follow these steps. First, I ask students to generate a list of topics, ideas, issues, or concepts presented in the work, in this case Macbeth. Responses include betrayal, power, opportunity, authority, evil, deception, ambition, greed, delusions, and so on. As the list grows, students are challenged to answer the question “What does Shakespeare believe about [one of the concepts]? For example, if we ask what does Shakespeare believe about ambition, the students can begin to see that he believes that ambition can be dangerous if a man follows it without moral restraint. They are then advised to choose a significant topic from the play, ask the question, and form the answer that will serve as their theme. The theme must be a full and complete sentence that states the author’s belief. The theme should not mention the play itself as the theme existed in the mind of the author before the play was written. Also, the theme should stand as a wise observation about the human condition. Once students have composed a theme, they have understood the message of the play, and they have a good theme for both their reader’s guide and their final essay.
The reader’s guide is a form students complete that asks them to state the author, title, date of publication, setting, and theme. They are then asked to give a very brief synopsis that identifies the protagonist, antagonist, conflict, climax and resolution. Finally, they are asked to identify the following elements of the play: protagonist’s role and characteristics; antagonist or antagonistic force and its characteristics; supporting characters, their role, characteristics, and whether they are dynamic, static, or symbolic; the source of the conflict; outstanding imagery; symbols; naming conventions; unusual scenes; and finally, significant or especially beautiful quotes. (A copy of this form can be found on my web page http://members.aol.com/jedarling under “Bell to Bell.” ) The reader’s guide compels the student to analyze the play by literary components rather than merely as a retelling of the story. In fact, the plot summary must remain terse and brief. Students know that if they lapse into retelling the story, they are merely recalling, not analyzing.
The out-of-class paper lends itself all to easily to opportunities for downloading ready-made essays from the internet, especially on a play like Macbeth. On the other hand, the timed writing, done in class, affords students the better opportunity of thinking through the play and composing a response in class under the guidance of the teacher. I try to use prompts patterned after the Advanced Placement English test prompts. To prepare students, I may have a day or two of seminar discussion about the prompt and the issues related to it. For example, if I were to use the old 1983 prompt that asks students to write about a work that features a villain, we would discuss Macbeth as a villain, what makes a villain, how a villain is exposed, etc. We would plot out a pattern of organization for discussing the villainy of Macbeth and gather detail to support the thesis. By the day designated for writing, students are equipped to respond well, plus the classroom environment ~ quiet and conducive to thoughtful response ~ affords the student a better chance of success on the final essay.
One final activity for concluding the study of Macbeth, and one I generally use for stronger students, and that is the compare/contrast essay on theme. We find that most works of literary merit have universal themes in common, albeit authors dress those themes in different settings, characters, and conflicts. Training students to see the commonalities in great works deepens their appreciation for good literature and reinforces the perennial messages that call us all to be better people. In this essay, I ask them to develop a theme present in two works and analyze how the two authors differ in story yet deliver the same message.
I keep a tutorial compare/contrast essay on my web page to guide students to imitate the structure of comparing and contrasting. I train them to identify the common elements in two works, and to compose paragraphs that interweave both works in a discussion of the element. Students tend to ‘lump’ their discussions into paragraphs on first one work and then on the other. I use a graphic organizer in prewriting activities that lists common elements down a center column. The two flanking columns are for notes on each text that pertain to that particular element. In preparation for writing the compare/contrast essay, I also do some instructing on how to document direct quotes and paraphrases, examples both of which are in the tutorial essay.
To illustrate, let us suppose that we might compare Macbeth with Beowulf, a text generally read before the play early in the senior year of English. A prewriting chart might look something like this, including a common theme:
Theme: A virtuous hero will resist the temptations of pride and power.
|
Beowulf |
Elements in both |
Macbeth |
|
|
Battles |
|
|
|
Banquets |
|
|
|
Heroes |
|
This theme holds true in both works, yet the stories span centuries. One centers upon the hero, while the other revolves around the villain. In one, the banquet scene reveals a community weakened by outside attack; in the other, the banquet scene reveals a community vulnerable to inside treachery. In both works, the battle comes down to hand-to-hand combat between the forces of good and evil. Such explorations foster good thinking skills that are useful beyond the classroom. This paper cannot be completed in class alone, and I generally request that it be typed, proofed, and revised, so it becomes quite an extended project. Nonetheless, students generally agree that the time is well spent in both reviewing a previous work and better understanding the work just completed.
Shakespeare remains in the canon, I would suggest, not merely because the language is lovely. His genius lies in his timeless appeal, his deep understanding of human nature, and his ability to present the foibles of humanity in some redeeming light. We read him because there is much to learn and enjoy. It is true that we flinch at the idea of paraphrasing, translating, or dumbing down the words of his plays, and maybe we should flinch. I believe we can preserve the beauty of the language while still inviting our students into a rich and full experiencing of the story. The trick is to let the language serve the story, and not the other way around. Story matters, and is it not some kind of paradox that as the language becomes more obscure to each generation, each generation needs the story more than ever before? Our challenge as teachers is to first empower the student to understand the story. If they value the story, then maybe they will learn to love the ancient language. But loving the language remains secondary to the higher goal of loving the story.
-------
See also Harumi Takemura’s article “Teaching Shakespeare in Japan: An Approach through the use of Film” in Anglofiles #120. (Red.)