Point awarded to Second Clown by First Clown. Check! Let’s look up on the board, Chuck. Is “Gallows” up there?
And it is! It is!
But let’s return for some more – can you name something else, Jim?

My friend pointed out that the things we are attracted to in others are usually things we’re seeking in ourselves or that we already have but don’t recognize.

I thought of that just now because this line made me think about how sexy I find someone with a sharp wit. And then I thought maybe I ought to recognize that mine’s not so bad either.

How about the playwright? Certainly this play has outlasted numerous buildings – more than might be counted.
Maybe that’s why we call them playwrights, like shipwrights. It is a construction built to last a lot of battering by the elements.

The notes on Genius suggest that this “confess thyself” is about admitting fault of some kind on the point of inquiry. Sure, fair play.
But – I cannot help but wonder about confession in the religious sense in a passage that is ABOUT the bible. There’s a lot of interesting exploration to be found in looking at the historical context of the Protestant/Catholic issues of the time.
It was illegal to be Catholic at this time but that doesn’t mean no one was Catholic nor that artifacts of Catholicism weren’t all over the Renaissance in England. This might be a really potent moment to look at through that lens.

At my reading, I made little categories for people to write down their responses. They were: Something I Liked, This Made Me Think About -, Thoughts About the Title and Questions.

I only got two pieces of feedback that weren’t useful and/or frustrating and they were both criticisms framed as questions. That is, they weren’t so much actual questions as a Jeopardy style re-phrasing – as in it’s actually an answer, not a genuine question. As in: “Why is this such a shitty question?”

So…next time – I’m leaving questions off my list. Or – I’ll keep it and then just immediately throw the responses in the garbage.

It would be very difficult. But I suppose it is possible. There are some people in this world who can do some rather extraordinary things without arms – why not digging too?

I would love to see a translation of the Bible that had this quality of language. Like – sort of salt of the earth irreverent voices instead of the authoritative distancing quality it usually has.

I mean – I do not know my scripture but I was 100% sure that it did not say “Adam digged.” Turns out it’s usually translated as “till the earth” and nothing about that style of language makes me want to read it.

But a Gravedigger’s Bible?
I’d read that in a heartbeat.

Honestly, I really don’t.
Not well at all.
It doesn’t make much sense to me
And when I encounter it, it seems
Shocking that people have built their lives around such a weird book.
I mean – Bleak House, I’d understand.
I could treat Dickens as my scripture.
I could suggest that we all strive to be more like Esther Sommmerset or Mr. Jarndyce.
But the Scripture, scripture?
I don’t get it at all.

Lightbulb! A heathen has its roots in the idea of one from the heath and one from the heath is godless (strictly speaking.) So when the witches plan to meet Macbeth on the HEATH – they are meeting him in a specifically godless place.
This makes me want to try my production of Macbeth again. The one we did when I was in grad school had a handful of the things I wanted but was not the show I was dreaming of. If I ever got it in my head to try again – this sense of the heath might play an interesting part. I think I’d find a way to show the Macbeths at a church of nature before surrendering to the darker forces of greed and the destruction of nature. My set designer made these stools for the banquet scene and they were the perfect metaphor for the lens on the play. They were a series of branches contained by an open wooden block. Free wood contained by domesticated wood. I wish we’d gotten better photos of that furniture. Or that I’d managed to grab one of the stools before they were returned to scrap.
They would be my starting point with a new version.

You just know this is a set up for a pun – even if you don’t know – you still probably know. Arms are such a ridiculously punnable thing.
Why does English do this? We have our arms, the very useful parts of our bodies, with those handy hands and connected by our supportive shoulders. But – weapons are also arms. Why – I have no idea. But the right to bear arms is not about the freedom to go around in a tank top. And there is even another meaning and that is a coat of arms – which is not a jacket made of body parts, don’t worry. But, according to Genius, this is the meaning the First Clown is aiming at here – because gentlemen have Coats of Arms.
My goodness English is such a weird language. Bless us.