Shakespeare Titus Andronicus

[regin...@gmail.com]

The eagle suffers little birds to sing, And is not careful what they mean thereby, Knowing that with the shadow of his wings. He can at pleasure stint their melody.

Churchill quoted it when he had meeting with Stalin and Roosevelt before the end of WWII. They discussed the post war settlement (should big and small countries have the same right to be heard).

Can someone tell me the meaning of this quote?
Thanks

[Harrison Hill]

Titus Andronicus is Shakespeare's worst play bar none. There are
plenty of terrible ones: Coroilanus, Timon of Athens, most of the
early stuff, but TA is the pits. Nice then that you pulled a gem out
of it!

The meaning is simple: the strong listen to the weak, but don't
*properly* listen to them, and can snuff those voices out whenever
they choose.

[Horace LaBadie]

In article <45dd7e3d-d35e-4cd2...@googlegroups.com>,

The great and powerful tolerate the small and weak, knowing that they
can at any time silence them with the mere threat of violence.

[Peter Brooks]

On Dec 22, 12:47 am, Harrison Hill <harrisonhill2...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Dec 21, 10:30 pm, regina....@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
> Titus Andronicus is Shakespeare's worst play bar none. There are
> plenty of terrible ones: Coroilanus, Timon of Athens, most of the
> early stuff, but TA is the pits. Nice then that you pulled a gem out
> of it!
>

What's wrong with it? I think it's a brilliant and powerful play. The
language may not be as memorable as that in Julius Caesar, Hamlet, or
Macbeth, and there's no speech like Jacques in 'As You Like It', but
is that the only measure of a play? I think that it's interesting to
compare Aaron, Cassius and Iago, they're all wicked, but Aaron is the
only one who is truly mad. Tamora is, I think, quite well-drawn too.

Julie Taymor's film version, with Anthony Hopkins, was a delight. Her
'Tempest' was crap - largely because of terrible casting, I think,
but, for the one to be so good and the other so bad, with the same
director, suggests that the play itself had something to do with it.
'The Tempest' is a difficult play to do well, mind you, the version by
the RSC with Anthony Sher, a few years ago was a very good puppet
show, but an unbelievably bad production from any other perspective -
apart from the terrible acting, it was overloaded with a very silly PC
interpretation, if something so daft could really be called an
interpretation.

What makes you dislike Titus Andronicus so much? I saw rather a good
film version of Coriolanus not that long ago, which made it seem a lot
less boring and irrelevant than a casual reading would suggest. I
agree that Timon of Athens is pretty dire, and I wasn't much impressed
by 'A Winter's Tale', but I've never seen either produced - who knows,
a first rate production might wring something good even from these.

I think it's a mistake to be absolutist about the quality of the plays
anyway - Hamlet impressed me as a child, but impresses me less now,
while King Lear becomes more appealing.

[Peter Brooks]

On Dec 22, 2:19 am, Horace LaBadie <hwlabadi...@nospam.highstream.net>
wrote:
> In article <45dd7e3d-d35e-4cd2...@googlegroups.com>,

Or, as Caligula put it; 'Oderint, dum metuant'.

[John Dean]

"Peter Brooks" <peter.h....@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:80c0a91e-9ffa-4efb...@17g2000vba.googlegroups.com...

On Dec 22, 12:47 am, Harrison Hill <harrisonhill2...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Dec 21, 10:30 pm, regina....@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
> Titus Andronicus is Shakespeare's worst play bar none. There are
> plenty of terrible ones: Coroilanus, Timon of Athens, most of the
> early stuff, but TA is the pits. Nice then that you pulled a gem out
> of it!
>
What's wrong with it? I think it's a brilliant and powerful play. The
language may not be as memorable as that in Julius Caesar, Hamlet, or
Macbeth, and there's no speech like Jacques in 'As You Like It', but
is that the only measure of a play? I think that it's interesting to
compare Aaron, Cassius and Iago, they're all wicked, but Aaron is the
only one who is truly mad. Tamora is, I think, quite well-drawn too.

-------------------------------------

Bear in mind many scholars believe this was one of Bard's co-authored works,
with George Peele as the likely main or sole collaborator. So you can always
blame the shit bits on Peele while reserving the accolades for Will.i.am.

--
John Dean

[Peter Brooks]

On Dec 22, 4:42 am, "John Dean" <john-d...@FRAGmsn.com> wrote:
> "Peter Brooks" <peter.h.m.bro...@gmail.com> wrote in message

I'm happy with that solution. I'm not sure, though, exactly what the
shit bits are. I know that it's fashionable to despise Titus
Andronicus - and its subject matter is disturbing. I don't think that
it makes it a bad play.

It is a universe better than some things, like 'Waiting for Godot'
that some people like to pretend is a great play. As a play, it is
much more interesting to watch than many others, including some of the
Shakespeare comedies.

I agree, that, if I had one night to watch a play and there happened
to be three performances of Shakespeare plays on, all with, raving
reviews from good critics, one being 'The Merchant of Venice', another
'Titus Andronicus' and a third 'Pericles', I'd probably plumb for the
last, simply because of it being different. But it'd take me a long
time to decide between the 'Merchant' and 'Titus' - I might even have
to toss a coin.

Surely most people would consider 'Titus' a better play than 'The
Taming of the Shrew'. A good 'Shrew' is fun, particularly if the
director is not po-faced, but you're not going to leave the theatre
moved, or even thinking about it much afterwards.

[Ian Noble]

On Fri, 21 Dec 2012 19:19:06 -0500, Horace LaBadie
<hwlab...@nospam.highstream.net> wrote:

>In article <45dd7e3d-d35e-4cd2...@googlegroups.com>,
> regin...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> The eagle suffers little birds to sing, And is not careful what they mean
>> thereby, Knowing that with the shadow of his wings. He can at pleasure stint
>> their melody.
>>
>> Churchill quoted it when he had meeting with Stalin and Roosevelt before the
>> end of WWII. They discussed the post war settlement (should big and small
>> countries have the same right to be heard).
>>
>> Can someone tell me the meaning of this quote?
>> Thanks
>
>The great and powerful tolerate the small and weak,

Not just them, but also their behaviour and posturing.

> knowing that they
>can at any time silence them with the mere threat of violence.

I'm not sure that even a threat of violence per se is implied; simply
that the stronger party has the undisputed means to pull the weaker
party back into line at any time with little or no effort.

Cheers - Ian
(BrE: Yorks., Hants.)

[R H Draney]

Peter Brooks filted:

>
>Surely most people would consider 'Titus' a better play than 'The
>Taming of the Shrew'. A good 'Shrew' is fun, particularly if the
>director is not po-faced, but you're not going to leave the theatre
>moved, or even thinking about it much afterwards.

Or at all...I'm not budging from my seat until Christopher Sly makes his
exit....r


--
Me? Sarcastic?
Yeah, right.

[Derek Turner]

On 22/12/2012 01:02, Peter Brooks wrote:
> I wasn't much impressed
> by 'A Winter's Tale', but I've never seen either produced - who knows,
> a first rate production might wring something good even from these.

I was privileged to see a stunning production at the RST in the 90's. In
those days we lived in Stratford and saw all the main-house productions
for free. This was the only one that I enjoyed so much that a paid to
see it again. John Nettles and (a heavily pregnant) Samantha Bond
starred, IIRC.

Yes memory serves. Was it really twenty years ago?

http://www.rscshakespeare.co.uk/wintersTale.html

Jeffrey Dench and Phyllida Hancock in the cast too.

And don't forget the most wonderful stage direction ever written!

[Dr Nick]

Derek Turner <frd...@cesmail.net> writes:

> On 22/12/2012 01:02, Peter Brooks wrote:
>> I wasn't much impressed by 'A Winter's Tale', but I've never seen
>> either produced - who knows, a first rate production might wring
>> something good even from these.
>
> I was privileged to see a stunning production at the RST in the
> 90's. In those days we lived in Stratford and saw all the main-house
> productions for free. This was the only one that I enjoyed so much
> that a paid to see it again. John Nettles and (a heavily pregnant)
> Samantha Bond starred, IIRC.

It was fantastic wasn't it. Nettles, who I've only otherwise seen in
light TV stuff, was mesmerising.

[Peter Brooks]

On Dec 22, 1:26 pm, Derek Turner <frde...@cesmail.net> wrote:
> On 22/12/2012 01:02, Peter Brooks wrote:
>
> > I wasn't much impressed
> > by 'A Winter's Tale', but I've never seen either produced - who knows,
> > a first rate production might wring something good even from these.
>
> I was privileged to see a stunning production at the RST in the 90's. In
> those days we lived in Stratford and saw all the main-house productions
> for free. This was the only one that I enjoyed so much that a paid to
> see it again. John Nettles and  (a heavily pregnant) Samantha Bond
> starred, IIRC.
>
> Yes memory serves. Was it really twenty years ago?
>
> http://www.rscshakespeare.co.uk/wintersTale.html
>

Wonderful - lucky you!