I Know We're Past the Whole Tempest Thing, but...

I had to write a post that I'd intended to write last week before I got horribly sick (sadly, almost all cold medications are strictly taboo for nursing moms, so we just gotta stick it out. I did try a fantastic combination of every home remedy ever suggested to me, which was kind of hilarious, and I got better after two days of bedrest, but alas neglected my blog a bit).

So!...

I want to respond (in a way) to Mikhaela's post about the fishy character of Caliban. I analyzed the same passage and Shakespeare's language here too caught my attention.

A strange fish! Were I in England now,
as once I was, and had but this fish painted,
not a holiday fool there but would give a piece
of silver: there would this monster make a
man; any strange beast there makes a man:
when they will not give a doit to relieve a lame
beggar, they will lazy out ten to see a dead
Indian. (The Tempest, Act II Scene II)

If I am interpreting this correctly, I believe what Trinculo is saying here is that Caliban is so savage and so ugly that the fools in England, who instead of relieving their poor, spend their money to see caged bear fights and dead Indians, would easily make him (Trinculo) rich if he were to bring back such a novelty as the savage Caliban. The irony in this (that makes this play so great) is that what truly makes Caliban savage is his betrayal of Prospero and there are painted fools in England who had done just the same and actually succeeded, making them even more savage than this fishy man.

In other news, I searched twitter for #Shakespeare and the very first ping I got was about The Tempest being banned, along with a number of other books that have ethnicity as a central issue, from being taught in some Tucson AZ schools. I have yet to understand why you would ban these books. Amazing. Here's a newclip about it.