Often Used Shakespeare Quotes

I often think . . . that the bookstores that will save civilization are not online, nor on campuses, nor named Borders, Barnes & Noble, Dalton, or Crown. They are the used bookstores, in which, for a couple of hundred dollars, one can still find, with some diligence, the essential books of our culture, from the Bible and Shakespeare to Plato, Augustine, and Pascal.

This to hear Would Desdemona seriously incline: But still the house-affairs would draw her thence: Which ever as she could with haste dispatch, She'ld come again, and with a greedy ear Devour up my discourse: which I observing, Took once a pliant hour, and found good means To draw from her a prayer of earnest heart That I would all my pilgrimage dilate, Whereof by parcels she had something heard, But not intentively: I did consent, And often did beguile her of her tears, When I did speak of some distressful stroke That my youth suffer'd. My story being done, She gave me for my pains a world of sighs: She swore, in faith, twas strange, 'twas passing strange, 'Twas pitiful, 'twas wondrous pitiful: She wish'd she had not heard it, yet she wish'd That heaven had made her such a man: she thank'd me, And bade me, if I had a friend that loved her, I should but teach him how to tell my story. And that would woo her. Upon this hint I spake: She loved me for the dangers I had pass'd, And I loved her that she did pity them. This only is the witchcraft I have used: Here comes the lady; let her witness it.

People of very different opinions--friends who can discuss politics, religion, and sex with perfect civility--are often reduced to red-faced rage when the topic of conversation is the serial comma or an expression like more unique. People who merely roll their eyes at hate crimes feel compelled to write jeremiads on declining standards when a newspaper uses the wrong form of its. Challenge my most cherished beliefs about the place of humankind in God's creation, and while I may not agree with you, I'll fight to the death for your right to say it. But dangle a participle in my presence, and I'll consider you a subliterate cretin no longer worth listening to, a menace to decent society who should be removed from the gene pool before you do any more damage.

There is a great danger in the tendency to suppose that opposition to authority is essentially meritorious and that unconventional opinions are bound to be correct: no useful purpose is served by smashing lamp-posts or maintaining Shakespeare to be no poet. Yet this excessive rebelliousness is often the effect that too much authority has on spirited pupils.

Instructions for Dad. I don't want to go into a fridge at an undertaker's. I want you to keep me at home until the funeral. Please can someone sit with me in case I got lonely? I promise not to scare you. I want to be buried in my butterfly dress, my lilac bra and knicker set and my black zip boots (all still in the suitcase that I packed for Sicily). I also want to wear the bracelet Adam gave me. Don't put make-up on me. It looks stupid on dead people. I do NOT want to be cremated. Cremations pollute the atmosphere with dioxins,k hydrochloric acid, hydrofluoric acid, sulphur dioxide and carbon dioxide. They also have those spooky curtains in crematoriums. I want a biodegradable willow coffin and a woodland burial. The people at the Natural Death Centre helped me pick a site not for from where we live, and they'll help you with all the arrangements. I want a native tree planted on or near my grave. I'd like an oak, but I don't mind a sweet chestnut or even a willow. I want a wooden plaque with my name on. I want wild plants and flowers growing on my grave. I want the service to be simple. Tell Zoey to bring Lauren (if she's born by then). Invite Philippa and her husband Andy (if he wants to come), also James from the hospital (though he might be busy). I don't want anyone who doesn't know my saying anything about me. THe Natural Death Centre people will stay with you, but should also stay out of it. I want the people I love to get up and speak about me, and even if you cry it'll be OK. I want you to say honest things. Say I was a monster if you like, say how I made you all run around after me. If you can think of anything good, say that too! Write it down first, because apparently people often forget what they mean to say at funerals. Don't under any circumstances read that poem by Auden. It's been done to death (ha, ha) and it's too sad. Get someone to read Sonnet 12 by Shakespeare. Music- "Blackbird" by the Beatles. "Plainsong" by The Cure. "Live Like You Were Dying" by Tim McGraw. "All the Trees of the Field Will Clap Their Hands" by Sufian Stevens. There may not be time for all of them, but make sure you play the last one. Zoey helped me choose them and she's got them all on her iPod (it's got speakers if you need to borrow it). Afterwards, go to a pub for lunch. I've got £260 in my savings account and I really want you to use it for that. Really, I mean it-lunch is on me. Make sure you have pudding-sticky toffee, chocolate fudge cake, ice-cream sundae, something really bad for you. Get drunk too if you like (but don't scare Cal). Spend all the money. And after that, when days have gone by, keep an eye out for me. I might write on the steam in the mirror when you're having a bath, or play with the leaves on the apple tree when you're out in the garden. I might slip into a dream. Visit my grave when you can, but don't kick yourself if you can't, or if you move house and it's suddenly too far away. It looks pretty there in the summer (check out the website). You could bring a picnic and sit with me. I'd like that. OK. That's it. I love you. Tessa xxx

I have said that in one respect my mind has changed during the last twenty or thirty years. Up to the age of thirty, or beyond it, poetry of many kinds, such as the works of Milton, Gray, Byron, Wordsworth, Coleridge, and Shelley, gave me great pleasure, and even as a schoolboy I took intense delight in Shakespeare, especially in the historical plays. I have also said that formerly pictures gave me considerable, and music very great delight. But now for many years I cannot endure to read a line of poetry: I have tried lately to read Shakespeare, and found it so intolerably dull that it nauseated me. I have also almost lost my taste for pictures or music. Music generally sets me thinking too energetically on what I have been at work on, instead of giving me pleasure. I retain some taste for fine scenery, but it does not cause me the exquisite delight which it formerly did. On the other hand, novels which are works of the imagination, though not of a very high order, have been for years a wonderful relief and pleasure to me, and I often bless all novelists. A surprising number have been read aloud to me, and I like all if moderately good, and if they do not end unhappily–against which a law ought to be passed. A novel, according to my taste, does not come into the first class unless it contains some person whom one can thoroughly love, and if a pretty woman all the better. This curious and lamentable loss of the higher aesthetic tastes is all the odder, as books on history, biographies, and travels (independently of any scientific facts which they may contain), and essays on all sorts of subjects interest me as much as ever they did. My mind seems to have become a kind of machine for grinding general laws out of large collections of facts, but why this should have caused the atrophy of that part of the brain alone, on which the higher tastes depend, I cannot conceive. A man with a mind more highly organised or better constituted than mine, would not, I suppose, have thus suffered; and if I had to live my life again, I would have made a rule to read some poetry and listen to some music at least once every week; for perhaps the parts of my brain now atrophied would thus have been kept active through use. The loss of these tastes is a loss of happiness, and may possibly be injurious to the intellect, and more probably to the moral character, by enfeebling the emotional part of our nature.

The Arden Shakespeare is intended both as a student text and as a revision of traditional scholarship. If it is to be used in the first way, then the often narrow thread of text above a sediment of footnotes, something Dr Leavis so deplored, can prove debilitating. Poems, especially the classics of our language, should be read headlong. Dubieties may be looked up later.

THE METAPHYSICAL POETS Had we but world enough, and time, This coyness, lady, were no crime (Andrew Marvell, To His Coy Mistress) While theatre was the most public literary form of the period, poetry tended to be more personal, more private. Indeed, it was often published for only a limited circle of readers. This was true of Shakespeare's sonnets, as we have seen, and even more so for the Metaphysical poets, whose works were published mostly after their deaths. John Donne and George Herbert are the most significant of these poets. The term 'Metaphysical' was used to describe their work by the eighteenth-century critic, Samuel Johnson. He intended the adjective to be pejorative. He attacked the poets' lack of feeling, their learning, and the surprising range of images and comparisons they used. Donne and Herbert were certainly very innovative poets, but the term 'Metaphysical' is only a label, which is now used to describe the modern impact of their writing. After three centuries of neglect and disdain, the Metaphysical poets have come to be very highly regarded and have been influential in recent British poetry and criticism. They used contemporary scientific discoveries and theories, the topical debates on humanism, faith, and eternity, colloquial speech-based rhythms, and innovative verse forms, to examine the relationship between the individual, his God, and the universe. Their 'conceits', metaphors and images, paradoxes and intellectual complexity make the poems a constant challenge to the reader.

Themes of descent often turn on the struggle between the titanic and the demonic within the same person or group. In Moby Dick, Ahab’s quest for the whale may be mad and “monomaniacal,” as it is frequently called, or even evil so far as he sacrifices his crew and ship to it, but evil or revenge are not the point of the quest. The whale itself may be only a “dumb brute,” as the mate says, and even if it were malignantly determined to kill Ahab, such an attitude, in a whale hunted to the death, would certainly be understandable if it were there. What obsesses Ahab is in a dimension of reality much further down than any whale, in an amoral and alienating world that nothing normal in the human psyche can directly confront. The professed quest is to kill Moby Dick, but as the portents of disaster pile up it becomes clear that a will to identify with (not adjust to) what Conrad calls the destructive element is what is really driving Ahab. Ahab has, Melville says, become a “Prometheus” with a vulture feeding on him. The axis image appears in the maelstrom or descending spiral (“vortex”) of the last few pages, and perhaps in a remark by one of Ahab’s crew: “The skewer seems loosening out of the middle of the world.” But the descent is not purely demonic, or simply destructive: like other creative descents, it is partly a quest for wisdom, however fatal the attaining of such wisdom may be. A relation reminiscent of Lear and the fool develops at the end between Ahab and the little black cabin boy Pip, who has been left so long to swim in the sea that he has gone insane. Of him it is said that he has been “carried down alive to wondrous depths, where strange shapes of the unwarped primal world glided to and fro . . . and the miser-merman, Wisdom, revealed his hoarded heaps.” Moby Dick is as profound a treatment as modern literature affords of the leviathan symbolism of the Bible, the titanic-demonic force that raises Egypt and Babylon to greatness and then hurls them into nothingness; that is both an enemy of God outside the creation, and, as notably in Job, a creature within it of whom God is rather proud. The leviathan is revealed to Job as the ultimate mystery of God’s ways, the “king over all the children of pride” (41:34), of whom Satan himself is merely an instrument. What this power looks like depends on how it is approached. Approached by Conrad’s Kurtz through his Antichrist psychosis, it is an unimaginable horror: but it may also be a source of energy that man can put to his own use. There are naturally considerable risks in trying to do so: risks that Rimbaud spoke of in his celebrated lettre du voyant as a “dérèglement de tous les sens.” The phrase indicates the close connection between the titanic and the demonic that Verlaine expressed in his phrase poète maudit, the attitude of poets who feel, like Ahab, that the right worship of the powers they invoke is defiance.

It was, as Berlin remembered it: “The fox knows many things, but the hedgehog knows one big thing.” 2 The passage survives only as a fragment, so its context has long been lost. But the Renaissance scholar Erasmus played around with it, 3 and Berlin couldn’t help doing the same. Might it become a scheme for classifying great writers? If so, Plato, Dante, Dostoevsky, Nietzsche, and Proust would all have been hedgehogs. Aristotle, Shakespeare, Goethe, Pushkin, and Joyce were obviously foxes. So was Berlin, who distrusted most big things—like logical positivism—but felt fully at ease with smaller ones. 4 Diverted by World War II, Berlin didn’t return to his quadrupeds until 1951, when he used them to frame an essay he was preparing on Tolstoy’s philosophy of history. It appeared two years later as a short book, The Hedgehog and the Fox. Hedgehogs, Berlin explained, “relate everything to a single central vision” through which “all that they say and do has significance.” Foxes, in contrast, “pursue many ends, often unrelated and even contradictory, connected, if at all, only in some de facto way.” The distinction was simple but not frivolous: it offered “a point of view from which to look and compare, a starting point for genuine investigation.” It might even reflect “one of the deepest differences which divide writers and thinkers, and, it may be, human beings in general.

Even when a word has been in usage for a long time, those whop are suspicious of what that means in terms of gender are quick to claim the change is too fast. 'They' has been used as a singular pronoun in English for hundreds of years; we find examples of the singular 'they' in the works of Shakespeare, Austen, and Swift. But trans people like me, who use the pronoun 'they' as a gender-neutral alternative to 'he' or 'she,' are often mislabeled in the media by editors who struggle with its usage. By implying that trans people are faddish and difficult about words, writers can cast aspersions on the validity of our language - and our selves. By claiming that our words are too hard to understand, the media perpetuates the idea that we are too hard to understand, and suggests that there's no point in trying.

And I still have other smothered memories, now unfolding themselves into limbless monsters of pain. Once, in a sunset-ending street of Beardsley, she turned to little Eva Rosen (I was taking both nymphets to a concert and walking behind them so close as almost to touch them with my person), she turned to Eva, and so very serenely and seriously, in answer to something the other had said about its being better to die than hear Milton Pinski, some local schoolboy she knew, talk about music, my Lolita remarked: 'You know, what's so dreadful about dying is that you are completely on your own'; and it struck me, as my automaton knees went up and down, that I simply did not know a thing about my darling's mind and that quite possibly, behind the awful juvenile clichés, there was in her a garden and a twilight, and a palace gate — dim and adorable regions which happened to be lucidly and absolutely forbidden to me, in my polluted rags and miserable convulsions; for I often noticed that living as we did, she and I, in a world of total evil, we would become strangely embarrassed whenever I tried to discuss something she and an older friend, she and a parent, she and a real healthy sweetheart, I and Annabel, Lolita and a sublime, purified, analyzed, deified Harold Haze, might have discussed — and abstract idea, a painting, stippled Hopkins or shorn Baudelaire, God or Shakespeare, anything of a genuine kind. Good will! She would mail her vulnerability in trite brashness and boredom, whereas I, using for my desperately detached comments an artificial tone of voice that set my own last teeth on edge, provoked my audience to such outburst of rudeness as made any further conversation impossible, oh my poor, bruised child.

It struck me, as my automaton knees went up and down, that I simply did not know a thing about my darling's mind and that quite possibly, behind the awful juvenile cliches, there was in her a garden and a twilight, and a palace gate—dim and adorable regions which happened to be lucidly and absolutely forbidden to me, in my polluted rags and miserable convulsions; for I often noticed that living as we did, she and I, in a world of total evil, we would become strangely embarrassed whenever I tried to discuss something she and an older friend, she and a parent, she and a real healthy sweetheart, I and Annabel, Lolita and a sublime, purified, analyzed, deified Harold Haze, might have discussed—an abstract idea, a painting, stippled Hopkins or shorn Baudelaire, God or Shakespeare, anything of a genuine kind. Good will! She would mail her vulnerability in trite brashness and boredom, whereas I, using for my desperately detached comments an artificial tone of voice that set my own last teeth on edge, provoked my audience to such outbursts of rudeness as made any further conversation impossible, oh my poor bruised child.

Take the oft-repeated injunction to get “its” and “it’s” straight. Everyone claims it’s remarkably easy to remember that “its” is possessive and “it’s” is a contraction. But logic tells us that in English, ’s attached to a noun signals possession: the dog’s dish, the cat’s toy, the lexicographer’s cry. So if English is logical, and there are simple rules to follow, why doesn’t “it’s” signal possession? We know that ’s also signals a contraction, but we don’t have any problems with differentiating between “the dog’s dish” and “the dog’s sleeping”—why should we suddenly have problems with “it’s dish” and “it’s sleeping”? This type of grammar often completely ignores hundreds (and, in some cases, well over a thousand) years of established use in English. For “it’s,” the rule is certainly easy to memorize, but it also ignores the history of “its” and “it’s.” At one point in time, “it” was its own possessive pronoun: the 1611 King James Bible reads, “That which groweth of it owne accord…thou shalt not reape”; Shakespeare wrote in King Lear, “It had it head bit off by it young.” They weren’t the first: the possessive “it” goes back to the fifteenth century. But around the time that Shakespeare was shuffling off this mortal coil, the possessive “it” began appearing as “it’s.” We’re not sure why the change happened, but some commentators guess that it was because “it” didn’t appear to be its own possessive pronoun, like “his” and “her,” but rather a bare pronoun in need of that possessive marker given to nouns: ’s. Sometimes this possessive appeared without punctuation as “its.” But the possessive “it’s” grew in popularity through the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries until it was the dominant form of the word. It even survived into the nineteenth century: you’ll find it in the letters of Thomas Jefferson and Jane Austen and the speechwriting notes of Abraham Lincoln. This would be relatively simple were it not for the fact that “it’s” was also occasionally used as a contraction for “it is” or “it has” (“and it’s come to pass,” Shakespeare wrote in Henry VIII, 1.2.63). Some grammarians noticed and complained—not that the possessive “it’s” and the contractive “it’s” were confusing, but that the contractive “it’s” was a misuse and mistake for the contraction “ ’tis,” which was the more standard contraction of “it is.” This was a war that the pedants lost: “ ’tis” waned while “it’s” waxed.

Simonton finds that on average, creative geniuses weren’t qualitatively better in their fields than their peers. They simply produced a greater volume of work, which gave them more variation and a higher chance of originality. “The odds of producing an influential or successful idea,” Simonton notes, are “a positive function of the total number of ideas generated.” Consider Shakespeare: we’re most familiar with a small number of his classics, forgetting that in the span of two decades, he produced 37 plays and 154 sonnets. Simonton tracked the popularity of Shakespeare’s plays, measuring how often they’re performed and how widely they’re praised by experts and critics. In the same five-year window that Shakespeare produced three of his five most popular works—Macbeth, King Lear, and Othello—he also churned out the comparatively average Timon of Athens and All’s Well That Ends Well, both of which rank among the worst of his plays and have been consistently slammed for unpolished prose and incomplete plot and character development. In every field, even the most eminent creators typically produce a large quantity of work that’s technically sound but considered unremarkable by experts and audiences. When the London Philharmonic Orchestra chose the 50 greatest pieces of classical music, the list included six pieces by Mozart, five by Beethoven, and three by Bach. To generate a handful of masterworks, Mozart composed more than 600 pieces before his death at thirty-five, Beethoven produced 650 in his lifetime, and Bach wrote over a thousand. In a study of over 15,000 classical music compositions, the more pieces a composer produced in a given five-year window, the greater the spike in the odds of a hit. Picasso’s oeuvre includes more than 1,800 paintings, 1,200 sculptures, 2,800 ceramics, and 12,000 drawings, not to mention prints, rugs, and tapestries—only a fraction of which have garnered acclaim. In poetry, when we recite Maya Angelou’s classic poem “Still I Rise,” we tend to forget that she wrote 165 others; we remember her moving memoir I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings and pay less attention to her other 6 autobiographies. In science, Einstein wrote papers on general and special relativity that transformed physics, but many of his 248 publications had minimal impact. If you want to be original, “the most important possible thing you could do,” says Ira Glass, the producer of This American Life and the podcast Serial, “is do a lot of work. Do a huge volume of work.” Across fields, Simonton reports that the most prolific people not only have the highest originality; they also generate their most original output during the periods in which they produce the largest volume.* Between the ages of thirty and thirty-five, Edison pioneered the lightbulb, the phonograph, and the carbon telephone. But during that period, he filed well over one hundred patents for other inventions as diverse as stencil pens, a fruit preservation technique, and a way of using magnets to mine iron ore—and designed a creepy talking doll. “Those periods in which the most minor products appear tend to be the same periods in which the most major works appear,” Simonton notes. Edison’s “1,093 patents notwithstanding, the number of truly superlative creative achievements can probably be counted on the fingers of one hand.

Other commonplaces go back even further. The proverb we use nowadays, ‘all that glitters is not gold’ is usually traced to Shakespeare’s Merchant of Venice Act II Scene iv: All that glisters is not gold; Often have you heard that told. The term “glisters” became glitters in time; it is, in effect, the same word. People had indeed ‘often heard that told’, prior to Shakespeare, Chaucer had it as: “Hit is not al gold, that glareth”. So, it was known in English poetry before Shakespeare even got to it. It is such an obvious truth that it is no surprise to discover that earlier civilisations used the same phrase. The Roman poets Shakespeare appears to have immersed himself in, and from whom Dylan, who also studied them at school, liberally quotes, include, amongst their lines, nōn omne quod nĭtet aurum est (‘Not all that glitters is gold’).

Other commonplaces go back even further. The proverb we use nowadays, ‘all that glitters is not gold’ is usually traced to Shakespeare’s Merchant of Venice Act II Scene iv: All that glisters is not gold; Often have you heard that told. The term “glisters” became glitters in time; it is, in effect, the same word. People had indeed ‘often heard that told’, prior to Shakespeare, Chaucer had it as: “Hit is not al gold, that glareth”. So, it was known in English poetry before Shakespeare even got to it. It is such an obvious truth that it is no surprise to discover that earlier civilisations used the same phrase. The Roman poets Shakespeare appears to have immersed himself in, and from whom Dylan, who also studied them at school, liberally quotes, include, amongst their lines, nōn omne quod nĭtet aurum est (‘Not all that glitters is gold’). It was a Latin proverb and well-known enough as to appear in Corpus Juris Civilis (the Book of Civil Law) some two and a half thousand years ago. Dylan puts a version of this ancient saying into the mouth of a grandparent dispensing a list of clichéd advice. Dylan thus acknowledges, as Shakespeare did, that here was an old truth, while simultaneously giving an intriguing twist to the concept: Grandma said, “Boy, go and follow your heart And you’ll be fine at the end of the line All that’s gold isn’t meant to shine Don’t you and your one true love ever part” As with other things we have heard and read and thought many times in our life, many of us never come across a version of this phrase without either hearing it in Dylan’s voice or thinking of its use in Shakespeare’s play and the extra resonance those bring to it. Such is the power of Bards.

Coffin,” as used in this recipe, meant a pie covered with a top crust. Coffin comes from the Middle French cofin for basket or holder. Pies and coffins were rectangular, square, or round and often had crusts thick enough to support the filling without an outer pan. Why, thou say’st true; it is a paltry cap, A custard-coffin, a bauble, a silken pie: I love thee well, in that thou lik’est it not. THE TAMING OF THE SHREW,

Another surprise, he said, was Shakespeare — apparently many more men than women teach it in English departments. Men are more likely to be described as a star, knowledgeable, awesome or the best professor. Women are more likely to be described as bossy, disorganized, helpful, annoying or as playing favorites. Nice or rude are also more often used to describe women than men.

An interesting comparison of the similarities and differences in vocabulary between the two books is given by Naegelsbach in his commentary. His observations lead him to conclude that Lamentations was not written by Jeremiah, but certainly by an eyewitness of the fall.24 W. H. Hornblower, the subsequent editor and enlarger of Naegelsbach’s commentary, followed up on that study with a defense of Jeremianic authorship. His predecessor had capitalized on expressions that were frequent in Lamentations but not used often or at all in Jeremiah. The intriguing approach of Hornblower was to conduct a comparison between the vocabulary of Shakespeare’s poems and his plays. Within only a few verses selected from the Shakesperian poems, he found several words that did not occur at all in his many plays.25 His point was to show the tenuous nature of dependence upon vocabularic studies for disproving the matter of authorship.

A Problem Play? It's not so surprising, then, that for the last 125 years All's Well has been known as a 'problem play' - a term used by the critic F.S. Boas to describe those plays by Shakespeare that mix comedy with tragedy, resolution with ambiguity, in complex and often unreconciled ways. Over the years, the term 'problem play' has expanded to include many plays that defy the conventions of genre or that raise questions about the ethical principles guiding its characters and events. But its worth noting that, for Boas and his contemporaries, the term 'problem play' applied most readily to the challenging realist drama of their time - and in particular to the work of Henrik Ibsen, who presented audiences with difficult, headstrong characters who, unconventionally, were often women. Rather than conforming to the stereotype of the quiet, compliant wife, mother, or daughter, these characters respond to social inequalities with a defiance, recklessness, and selfishness that is at once damaging and liberating. Whether this rings true for Shakespeare's Helena depends on how we read and perform her. But one thing that does remain constant, across time, place, and production, is that All's Well and its characters are never straightforwardly easy or likable. Perhaps this is why they remain so relevant, like it or not, to life as know it today.

isn’t just the words he chose but how he used them that make the language of Hamlet so challenging. Shakespeare clearly wanted audiences to work hard, and one of the ways he made them do so was by employing an odd verbal trick called hendiadys. Though the term may be strange, examples of it—“law and order,” “house and home,” or the Shakespearean “sound and fury”—are familiar enough. Hendiadys literally means “one by means of two,” a single idea conveyed through a pairing of nouns linked by “and.” When conjoined in this way, the nouns begin to oscillate, seeming to qualify each other as much as the term each individually modifies. Whether he is exclaiming “Angels and ministers of grace defend us” (1.4.39), declaring that actors are “the abstract and brief chronicles of the time” (2.2.524), speaking of “the book and volume of my brain” (1.5.103), or complaining of “a fantasy and trick of fame” (4.4.61), Hamlet often speaks in this way. The more you think about hendiadys, the more they induce a kind of mental vertigo. Take for example Hamlet’s description of “the book and volume of my brain.” It’s easy to get the gist of what he’s saying, and the phrase would pass unremarked in the course of a performance. But does he mean “book-like volume” of my mind? Or “big book of my mind”? Part of the problem here is that the words bleed into each other—“volume” of course is another word for “book” but also means “space.” The destabilizing effect of how these words play off each other is slightly and temporarily unnerving

Shrewd Shakespeare understood that the paradox of drama also ticks at the heart of life itself: we can't truly bear, understand or transcend tragedy without humour and we definitely appreciate levity more when unburdened from pitch darkness. Deepest drama often demands a sudden crash of laughter's lightning bolt. Surgically-wielded comic relief, used with acute awareness of audience and moment, doesn't merely lighten a heavy scene; it provides the critical human counterpoint, a vital exhale allowing the audience to bear the weight, and feel it all the more intensely when tension returns, effectively disproving the literally-minded misconception that to laugh at something is to disrespect it or not take it seriously. This profound effect isn't just theatrical technique; it taps into a timeless human impulse—gallows humour, whistling past the graveyard—a deep-seated capacity to find release and digest life's bitterest truths, even in the face of overwhelming gravity.

You know, there’s something subtle but significant that happens when we talk about people, especially in professional settings. When men achieve something noteworthy, we often refer to them by just their last name. Darwin, Dickens, Shakespeare. But when it comes to women, even those who are equally accomplished, we tend to use their full names. Marie Curie, Emily Dickinson, Jane Austen. It’s as if there’s an underlying bias that suggests a woman isn’t as widely recognized or deserving of prominence, so we feel the need to specify her full name. But by doing that, we can unintentionally diminish her standing, as if she’s not on the same level…

it wasn’t so much a matter of how many words he used, but what he did with them—and no one has ever done more. It is often said that what sets Shakespeare apart is his ability to illuminate the workings of the soul and so on, and he does that superbly, goodness knows, but what really characterizes his work—every bit of it, in poems and plays and even dedications, throughout every portion of his career—is a positive and palpable appreciation of the transfixing power of language. A Midsummer Night’s Dream remains an enchanting work after four hundred years, but few would argue that it cuts to the very heart of human behavior. What it does do is take, and give, a positive satisfaction in the joyous possibilities of verbal expression.

You’re tiny too, wild thing.” Tiny, yes, but fucking fierce. I’m pretty sure that’s Shakespeare, but I’m not sure Shakespeare used the word fuck all that often, so I keep it to myself.

The rhetoric of this sequence converges to the third couplet, where the parallel structures and the use of the same word – ‘me’ – as the rhyme enact the same collapse of difference that the play develops elsewhere. Linguistic and rhetorical doubling, through parallel syntax and through the heavy use of rhyme, show us the way that Shakespeare’s language is a microcosm of his wider dramatic art: what happens at the level of a sentence or speech often miniaturizes a wider theme or debate.

Shakespeare often violated rules of Latin word formation and this may well have got up the noses of the purists of the time. However, some expressions would simply have outlived their usefulness. There is not much call these days for a questrist ‘one who goes in quest of another’.

Booking a literary tour vacation through Expedia is easier and more personalized when you call ☎️+1(888)796-1496 directly. By speaking with an Expedia specialist at ☎️+1(888)796-1496, you can customize your trip to visit iconic bookstores, author homes, libraries, and literary landmarks tailored specifically to your interests. Calling ☎️+1(888)796-1496 ensures your itinerary is crafted with expert insight and accuracy. When you call ☎️+1(888)796-1496, be prepared with your preferred destinations or authors you admire. For example, if you want to explore Shakespeare’s England, Ernest Hemingway’s Paris, or the literary cafes of New York, the Expedia agent at ☎️+1(888)796-1496 will help tailor your trip accordingly. Having your travel dates, group size, and accommodation preferences handy improves the booking process through ☎️+1(888)796-1496. Expedia phone agents can help you choose the best hotels near key literary spots. For example, you might want to stay near the British Library or Faulkner’s home in Oxford. Calling ☎️+1(888)796-1496 allows you to request specific hotel amenities such as quiet reading lounges, on-site libraries, or historical charm, making your literary vacation immersive. The specialist at ☎️+1(888)796-1496 can also book guided tours, tickets to literary festivals, or even arrange meetings with local authors or book clubs. One major advantage of calling ☎️+1(888)796-1496 is that Expedia agents have access to exclusive deals and packages not always visible online. They can combine flights, hotels, and activities into one seamless booking tailored to your literary interests. The agents at ☎️+1(888)796-1496 also ensure that transportation between multiple cities on your tour is well coordinated, preventing any logistical headaches. If you’re interested in visiting specific events like book fairs or author signings, call ☎️+1(888)796-1496 early to secure accommodations and tickets. These popular events often sell out quickly, but Expedia’s team at ☎️+1(888)796-1496 can provide updates on availability and even priority access in some cases. Mentioning your literary passions when you call ☎️+1(888)796-1496 allows the agent to offer personalized recommendations. For multi-city literary tours, such as a journey through the American South or European literary capitals, Expedia specialists at ☎️+1(888)796-1496 can handle the complexities of multiple bookings. They’ll coordinate hotel stays, car rentals, and flights to optimize your travel time and experience. Calling ☎️+1(888)796-1496 is particularly useful for crafting itineraries that maximize time spent at must-see literary sites. Your call to ☎️+1(888)796-1496 can also include requests for room types suitable for relaxing with a good book after a day of exploring. Some hotels offer themed rooms or suites decorated with literary motifs. Expedia’s agents at ☎️+1(888)796-1496 can help you find such unique accommodations that enhance your literary vacation vibe. If you prefer independent bookstores over major chains or want to explore local reading events, the Expedia agent at ☎️+1(888)796-1496 can help identify small businesses and cultural spots often missed by general tourists. Calling ☎️+1(888)796-1496 opens doors to these authentic experiences. Don’t forget to inquire about travel insurance and cancellation policies during your call. Literary tours can sometimes require last-minute changes if festivals or events shift dates. Expedia’s phone specialists at ☎️+1(888)796-1496 can guide you through flexible booking options to protect your investment. Additionally, if you’re traveling with a group of book lovers, such as a book club or a school class, calling ☎️+1(888)796-1496 lets you book multiple rooms or even private tours together. Expedia agents at ☎️+1(888)796-1496 can arrange group discounts or special event access. In summary, booking a literary tour vacation by phone through Expedia is a thought

[[+1↺877↺245↺9769]] Can I Cancel My Frontier Flight for Free? If you are flying with Frontier Airlines and your plans suddenly change, you might be asking yourself, Can I cancel my Frontier flight for free Call at +1↺877↺245↺9769? The answer depends on when you cancel and what type of fare you purchased. Frontier Airlines is a low-cost carrier, which means while they offer affordable base fares, flexibility often comes with restrictions and fees. The good news is that Frontier provides a 24-hour risk-free cancellation policy Call at +1↺877↺245↺9769. This means if you book your flight at least seven days before departure, you can cancel it within 24 hours of booking and receive a full refund without any penalty Call at +1↺877↺245↺9769. This is the best way to cancel your flight for free with Frontier. However, if you cancel after the 24-hour window, whether or not you pay a cancellation fee depends on your ticket type Call at +1↺877↺245↺9769. For standard fares, cancellations usually come with a fee ranging between $49 and $119 per passenger, depending on how close to the departure date you cancel Call at +1↺877↺245↺9769. The closer you are to your flight, the higher the fee tends to be. On the other hand, if you purchased Frontier’s WORKS bundle, you have much more flexibility Call at +1↺877↺245↺9769. The WORKS bundle allows you to cancel your flight at any time and receive a full refund in the original form of payment Call at +1↺877↺245↺9769. This makes it the best option for travelers who want peace of mind in case their plans change. Another thing to remember is that even if you don’t qualify for a free cancellation, Frontier often gives you the option to receive the remaining balance of your ticket as a travel credit after deducting the cancellation fee Call at +1↺877↺245↺9769. This credit can be used toward a future Frontier flight, which can be helpful if you fly with the airline regularly Call at +1↺877↺245↺9769. Additionally, some passengers with special circumstances such as medical emergencies or military orders may be able to request exceptions by contacting Frontier’s customer support team directly Call at +1↺877↺245↺9769. To sum up, yes—you can cancel your Frontier flight for free, but only if you act within the 24-hour risk-free cancellation period or if you purchased the WORKS bundle Call at +1↺877↺245↺9769. Otherwise, expect to pay a cancellation fee. Knowing these rules ahead of time can help you avoid unnecessary charges and make smarter decisions when booking with Frontier Airlines Call at +1↺877↺245↺9769.

[[+1||866||673||2063]] How Do I Rebook a Missed Ryanair Airlines Flight? Missing a Ryanair flight can be stressful, but understanding the airline’s policies can make the rebooking process smoother. If you miss your Ryanair flight, the first thing to know is that Ryanair operates as a low-cost carrier with strict boarding rules Call at +1||866||673||2063. Unlike some full-service airlines, Ryanair does not allow free rebooking for passengers who miss their flight. If your flight has already departed, your original ticket is generally considered forfeited, and you will need to book a new flight if you still wish to travel Call at +1||866||673||2063. To rebook a missed Ryanair flight, the first step is to contact Ryanair customer service immediately Call at +1||866||673||2063. You can call their reservations team or use the Ryanair website and mobile app to check for available flights Call at +1||866||673||2063. Ryanair offers a “Flexi Plus” fare that sometimes allows more flexibility for changes, but if you booked a standard ticket, you will likely need to pay the current fare for the next available flight. Acting quickly can help secure the best possible rate for rebooking Call at +1||866||673||2063. If you miss your flight due to circumstances beyond your control, such as severe weather or airport delays, it’s still essential to reach out to Ryanair as soon as possible. While the airline does not guarantee free rebooking, they may offer alternative solutions or allow you to use the ticket value toward a future booking, usually with an additional fee Call at +1||866||673||2063. Always have your booking reference number ready, as this speeds up the rebooking process and ensures accurate assistance Call at +1||866||673||2063. For passengers arriving late at the airport, remember that Ryanair enforces strict boarding gate times. You must reach the gate before it closes; otherwise, you will not be permitted to board Call at +1||866||673||2063 . In some cases, Ryanair may offer standby options or allow you to purchase a new ticket at the airport, but fees are often higher than online rebooking. To avoid missing flights in the future, consider online check-in, arriving at least 2 hours before departure, and signing up for flight alerts via email or the Ryanair app Call at +1||866||673||2063. In conclusion, rebooking a missed Ryanair flight requires prompt action and understanding of the airline’s strict policies Call at +1||866||673||2063. Contact Ryanair customer support immediately, check online for available flights, and be prepared to pay any additional fees or fare differences. Planning ahead, arriving early, and choosing flexible fare options like Flexi Plus can prevent future complications and ensure smoother travel experiences with Ryanair Call at +1||866||673||2063.

{{+1▶877▶245▶9769}} How much does it cost to change a flight with Frontier? If you’re planning a trip with Frontier Airlines and suddenly need to adjust your travel plans, you might be wondering: How much does it cost to change a flight with Frontier? call at {{+1▶877▶245▶9769}} Flight changes are common, and knowing the fees and policies ahead of time can save you both money and stress. Frontier, like many low-cost airlines, has specific rules and charges that depend on when and how you make the changes call at {{+1▶877▶245▶9769}}. Frontier Airlines typically charges a flight change fee that varies depending on how far in advance you make the adjustment call at {{+1▶877▶245▶9769}}. If you decide to change your booking 60 days or more before departure, Frontier generally allows it without charging a fee call at {{+1▶877▶245▶9769}}. This is great news for travelers who plan ahead. However, if you request a change closer to your flight date, fees can range between $49 and $119 per passenger, depending on the time left before departure call at {{+1▶877▶245▶9769}}. For example: 60+ days before departure – No change fee. 7 to 59 days before departure – Around $49 per passenger. 6 days or less before departure – Up to $119 per passenger. It’s also important to note that if the new flight you choose is more expensive than your original one, you will need to pay the fare difference in addition to the change fee call at {{+1▶877▶245▶9769}}. On the other hand, if the new ticket is cheaper, Frontier usually issues the difference as travel credit, which you can use for a future trip call at {{+1▶877▶245▶9769}}. Another way to save on flight change fees is by purchasing Frontier’s WORKS or PERKS bundle call at {{+1▶877▶245▶9769}}, which includes flexibility perks like free flight changes and cancellations. If you fly with Frontier often, this could be a worthwhile investment call at {{+1▶877▶245▶9769}}. If you’re unsure about your specific booking and want the most accurate details, it’s best to speak directly with a Frontier Airlines representative call at {{+1▶877▶245▶9769}}. You can easily reach their support at 1-866-673-2063 or 1-877-245-9769 for assistance with your change request, fee details, or alternative flight options call at {{+1▶877▶245▶9769}}. In short, the cost to change a flight with Frontier depends on how early you act call at {{+1▶877▶245▶9769}}. The sooner you make changes, the more money you’ll save. So, if your plans shift, don’t wait until the last minute—make the change as early as possible to avoid high fees call at {{+1▶877▶245▶9769}}.

[[+1||866||673||2063]] How Do I Rebook a Missed Aer Lingus Flight? Missing an Aer Lingus flight can be stressful, but acting quickly and understanding the airline’s policies can help you continue your journey without unnecessary delays. If you miss your Aer Lingus flight, the first and most important step is to contact Aer Lingus customer service immediately at [[+1||866||673||2063]]. By reaching out quickly, you can secure the best available rebooking options and minimize additional costs. Rebooking a missed Aer Lingus flight depends heavily on the type of ticket you purchased. Flexible or Plus fares typically allow more freedom to change flights with reduced or no fees, while basic economy or saver fares may require you to pay a change fee plus any fare difference to book a new flight. By calling [[+1||866||673||2063]], you can get direct support, discuss available flights, and choose the most affordable and convenient option based on your situation. Always have your booking reference number and travel details ready when contacting customer service to ensure a faster process. If your missed flight is due to circumstances beyond your control, such as connecting flight delays, weather disruptions, or medical emergencies, Aer Lingus may provide additional support. While free rebooking is not guaranteed, customer service often works with passengers to arrange the next available flight, especially if you notify them as soon as possible. In some cases, same-day rebooking can be arranged at the airport ticket desk or by calling [[+1||866||673||2063]], depending on seat availability and ticket rules. It’s also important to remember that arriving after the gate has closed means boarding will not be permitted, even if you are already checked in. To avoid this, Aer Lingus recommends arriving at least 90 minutes before European flights and 2–3 hours before long-haul international flights. Using online check-in, mobile boarding passes, and flight alerts can further reduce the risk of missing your departure. In summary, rebooking a missed Aer Lingus flight requires fast action, clear understanding of your ticket type, and immediate contact with the airline. Call [[+1||866||673||2063]] to get rebooked on the next available flight, be prepared to pay change fees or fare differences, and consider booking flexible fares in the future for added peace of mind. With quick communication and proper planning, you can continue your journey with Aer Lingus smoothly and with minimal stress.