With so much interesting research emerging attesting to Magick-Workers in Early America, it seems undeniable that the Magickal Traditions of the Old World made their way into America through the immigration of European settlers. While such people may not have exerted monstrous amounts of influence in the settling of the New World (preferring, apparently, to seek out relatively unpopulated places such as the Appalachian mountains, or the mountains of the American Northeast, or at least in one case- to judge from the “Joshua Gordon Witchcraft Book” held at the University of South Carolina- the 1600s Southern frontier), it is noteworthy that we- meaning, Magickally-minded Folks, inclined towards the Old Ways- have had our place in America (hidden, secret, living “on the down-low”), but there, and hence, here.

Fascinating as that is, what really intrigues me is the extent to which early American Magick-Use reflects back upon the Europe of the late 1500s/ early 1600s- still the Age of Magick, with the Burning Times still going on (the 1600s, the first period of settlement in the New World, is also the last century of the Witch-Burnings). Early American Magick-Use provides another prism through which to judge the Magickal beliefs and practices of the Old World; what is most intriguing is the degree to which these beliefs and practices appear to involve Circle-Casting, or the Formation of a Magickal Circle-Space.

For instance, in The Silver Bullet and Other American Witch Stories, we learned of Magickal Folk-Beliefs carried into the Appalachian mountains by Irish, English, Scots, and German settlers- which apparently were preserved long enough to be recorded in the stories found in this book, which were generated in the 1930s. Another book, Signs, Cures, & Witchery, also finds copious amounts of Old World Magick-Belief transported into Appalachia- this time, specifically looking at the activities of German pioneers. What is especially interesting (to my mind) is the number of times that someone in The Silver Bullet describes casting a Magick Circle in order to perform Magick: casting a Magick Circle exactly as we are accustomed to casting Circles, but described in the context of Depression Era mountaintop Folk-Magick.

However, not surprising: if one considers the evidence that Circle-Casting was widely associated with Magick-Work in England during the Elizabethan Age of the late 1500s and the Jacobean Age of the early 1600s.

Circle-Casting- or Circle-Formation, as perhaps the case may be- divides in the Time into two categories: (1) the Grimoire-Tradition, carried in medieval grimoires innumerable issued throughout the Middle Ages; these will be the Traditions that seem to us most like those of the Gardnerians, the Alexandrians, and all those influenced by the writings of Gardner, Valiente, Crowther, the Sanders, the Farrars (et al), and which will be reflected by the learned elite of the medieval period, able to read said written occult-works, the Grimoires (2) as well as the Oral-Folk Culture Traditions carried by Oral-Folk Culture practitioners such as village Wise-Women and Cunning-Men; these are reflected in the “Witch” Plays (as opposed to the “Wizard” Plays, inspired by the educated Grimoire-Tradition), and are based upon the sometimes-raucous, often improvisational Tradition that we associate with “Energy-Raising.”

Perhaps the most famous example of the Elizabethan Grimoire-derived (Ceremonial-Traditional) Circle-Casting known to us is that presented to us by Marlowe in Doctor Faustus (c. 1592), in Act I, scene iii, lines 8-24: Faustus formally charges into being the Circle that he has transcribed on his floor (as per the illustration attached to the printed play, seen above). Being of the Christian Magick variety, this Circle is particularly “anagrammatized” with the Name of Jehovah, as well as laid out by the “figures of every adjunct to the Heavens, and characters of signs and erring stars”- that is, it has been made to resemble in miniature an outline of the Astrological Heavens themselves, in a very Microcosm/ Macrocosm, “As Above, So Below” sort of deal. This Circle is further empowered by calling in the Spirits of the Four Elements.

Caveat: as the Wikipedia entry on the play will tell you, Marlowe’s play was published in two versions, known as the Text A and the Text B versions: the Text A is thought to resemble more closely Marlowe’s original script, with Text B representing an “improved-upon” version of the play reworked after Marlowe’s untimely death. As the Wikipedia entry notes, there are differences between the two versions of the play- but as the Wikipedia entry fails to point out, in Text B (the text most often reproduced, as people tend to play it safe by putting into print the greatest possible number of words potentially committed by Marlowe to paper), the Names of only three of the Four Elements are called (“Earth” is omitted). Text A calls in all Four Elements- which makes the most sense- and demonstrates to us a genuine late 1500s Tradition of Consecrating a Magick-Circle by Calling In all Four of the Mystical Elements of Life. (The reason for “Earth’s” absence is surely as simple as, the type-setter blanked. Maybe it was getting close to lunchtime, and he was hungry and distracted.)

Another caveat: in the interest of being totally responsible in the transmission of Magickal Knowledge- Dr. Faustus’ Legend comes to us as the Supreme Example of the Perils of Trafficking with the Forces of Darkness. The Middle Ages took such things strenuously seriously, and so we have the cautionary Tale of Faustus: who was Fool enough to believe that he could contract with the Forces of [Christian] Hell and live to tell the tale.

In short, Faust represents the ultimate in Christian Theology cautioning one against Magickal Practicing. But you know what? Here’s how I look at it: Faustus actually ASKS the Devil to come into his Circle (the Devil being represented as the reptilian sort-of creature in the picture next to Faust, just outside of his Magickally Protective Circle). Never mind the Pagan Thealogical Question: Do we as Pagans even give credence to the Thought-Form of the Devil? (I, for one, do not, and therefore- it seems to me- avoid the obvious pratfall of Faust by Calling In only such Deities as Whom I judge to be Honorable and Just, and with Whom I feel comfortable that I have established a fair Working-Relationship.)

Another example of Circle-Casting in a play whose Cultural influence is extremely difficult to question, is that presented by Shakespeare in The Tempest (c. 1610). Although explained merely by a stage-direction- following Line 57, Act V, scene i: “They all enter the Circle which Prospero had made, and there stand charmed”- Prospero’s famous speech “Ye Elves of hills, brooks, standing lakes, and groves” is meant to be understood as a Circle-Invocation inspired by Ovid’s account of Medea’s Invocation to the Spirits of Nature in Metamorphoses. As represented in Julie Taymor’s 2010 movie-version starring (in a status-changing gender-bending performance) Helen Mirren as the Female Wizard Prospera, the speech is every bit a Circle-Invocation as much as that presented by Shakespeare’s contemporary Marlowe- but oriented from a very Nature-driven perspective. It demonstrates to us that- at least for Shakespeare, in the early 1600s- Circle-Casting could be thought effective if engaged purely from an orientation towards Nature, rather than from a strictly Ceremonial Traditional point-of-view. (It might be, if you watch enough productions of The Tempest, that you don’t see many examples of Prospero or Prospera actually Casting a Circle during this speech; I believe that is because so many people nowadays simply do not know what to make of the stage-direction “the Circle that Prospero had made,” having no cultural context through which to formulate the Magick-Circle. In short, I don’t think many theater-folk today understand a “Magick Circle,” and so, have no idea how to stage this segment of The Tempest.)

And then there is the Circle-Casting found in singular form in the “Witch-Plays” of the late 1500s-early 1600s: whereas the Grimoire-Traditions are preserved in written manuscripts read by the educated and the literate, the Ways of Witchcraft must have been maintained through oral Folk-Culture. Apparently there was, at least in England, a coherent system identified as “Witchcraft : the Witches in Shakespeare’s Macbeth, Jonson’s The Sad Shepherd and The Masque of Queens, and Middleton’s The Witch all do the same thing as “Witchcraft” in all four plays, what we would consider to be the most significant Witch-Plays of the early 1600s. This involves forming a Magickal Circle- but unlike the Ceremonial Magicians, who enact recorded ritual in a dignified manner, the Witches generate their mystical Spaces through intention, rhythm, movement, music, and excitement: very much what we would term “Raising Energy.” So much folklore surrounds the idea that Witches (like Faeries) danced in Circles, that we should not be surprised to find Circle-Dancing associated with all these Jacobean Witches: the Witches in Macbeth (c. 1605), for instance, dance “hand in hand” in order to “wind up their Charm” in Act One, scene iii; similarly, in Act Four, scene i, they dance around their Cauldron (which will cause one to dance in a Circle) in order to “set the stage” for the Thane of Glamis and for the Spirits that they will raise for him, ending the scene by performing a last “antic Round,” or excited Circle-Dance.

The male Ceremonial Traditions of the late Middle Ages are driven by the performance of prescribed ritual; the female Witchcraft Traditions of Jacobean England are set in motion through “Energy-Raising” spectacles (as we would think of them); yet both Traditions depend upon an understanding of an enchanted, specialized (Circular) Magickal Space.

Far from being held super-secret, however, Magickal Traditions appear to have been openly embraced in England during the time of Elizabeth: there was a flourishing business of printing and selling pamphlet-edition Spell-Books and “How to” Magickal manuals, with George Lyman Kittredge providing many examples of “grass-roots” Magickal experimentation in Witchcraft in Old and New England. The fact that plays which deal with Magickal matters are clearly popular is an indication of the Elizabethan/ Jacobean interest in Magick, and the fact that Magickal Ceremonies are performed in Magickal Plays presented as popular theater plainly indicates all by itself a means of transmission of this knowledge.

Assuming that Circle-Casting is indeed well-established as late 1500s/ early 1600s English Magickal custom, we would imagine English settlers in the New World to transport faith in Magickal Circle-Casting with them into America: exactly as we seem to find in early 20th century Appalachia.

All of this might be understood as cultural encouragement to consider Circle-Casting as primary in the performance of the Magickal Arts.

 

I believe that I predicted, a year ago, when Helen Mirren’s film of The Tempest came out (reinterpreting Prospero the Magician as a female), that this would become a hot trend in Shakespearean circles (especially as it is unusual, 400 years later, to come upon a truly revolutionary reinterpretation of a part, and as it discovers- yea, like unto the New World- a fascinating new Gender-Dimension to a Major Shakespeare Play, as well as suddenly making available to accomplished actresses of a certain age a Major Shakespearean Role, hitherto played exclusively by men). Apparently so, as today’s “Arts, Briefly,” in the New York Times, compiled by Adam W. Kepler (Mon., Jan. 16, 2012, p. C2) announces that Olympia Dukakis will play [Prospera] this summer, at Shakespeare & Co, in Lenox, Mass. In another interesting casting move, her own brother, Apollo Dukakis, will play Prospera’s usurping brother (it’s rare to have actual siblings in the roles). Considering that Vanessa Redgrave started this actress-trend by first playing The Wizard of Shakespeare’s canon in 2000, at Shakespeare’s Globe Theater, in London- she performed it as a man, but still- this brings to 3 the number of notable actresses to play the part. (And I so hope that someone films the Divine Ms. Redgrave in the role, if only in a filmed stage-version such as Christopher Plummer’s.) All this means, for Pagans: we see a reinvigorated interest in the one Shakespearean character to represent the Magickal Traditions of Elizabethan England- down to the Casting of an Elizabethan Magick-Circle.

 

Question: what Shakespeare play starring a Magick-User makes a popular subject for filming these days? If you guessed The Tempest, you’d be right (especially after Helen Mirren’s amazing turn last year in Julie Taymor’s production). Notable Shakespearean actor Christopher Plummer (in all likelihood most familiar to Americans as Capt. von Trapp opposite Julie Andrews in The Sound of Music) played the role to great acclaim in the Stratford Shakespeare Festival, in a filmed performance that will debut at Symphony Space in New York City, on Sunday, Nov. 6, 2011, at 3:30pm (a question-and-answer session will follow). The Stratford festival says that DVDs of the performance will be available after a limited theatrical and television release (orders may be placed at 1-800-567-1600); a YouTube preview of the show may be seen here.

 

Prospero is interesting because he is one of Shakespeare’s few characters (others being the Witches and Lear’s Fool) to be derived from an Archetype- Prospero is basically the Magician in the Tarot, with a play woven in behind him. Moreover, the specific components associated with Prospero- the betrayed and exiled wizard; the hermit living alone in a remote and exotic outpost; the master of fantastically powerful beings; the solitary parent- have generated much inspiration, so well-known and beloved is Shakespeare’s classic.

For instance- consider Obi-Wan Kenobi from the original Star Wars. A master of the mysterious Force that binds the universe together; who fled the Evil Empire and the betrayal of his disciple; to live alone on the barren planet Tatooine; with his Magician’s Wand (his Light-Saber) his device of power.

Then Obi-Wan starts teaching Luke the Force, and kind of turns into Merlin with young Arthur- but he starts out as Prospero.

Do you remember that shot from Jurassic Park- when Richard Attenborough is gazing intently at his walking-stick, decorated on top by a chunk of amber, with a prehistoric insect frozen inside? Richard Attenborough, who ruled a distant tropical island, where science had succeeded in working a feat of magic, and Richard Attenborough thought that he had a jungle full of Calibans (dinosaurs) under control?

Do you think that’s why Spielberg shows us the shot of Attenborough with his walking-stick- so that we get that it is Prospero with his Wand?

The Tempest-in-outer-space was the premise for one of the first sci-fi films ever- 1956′s Forbidden Planet! An inspiration for Star Trek, the movie stars the recently departed Leslie Nielsen as the captain of a space-team tracking down the mysteriously vanished Dr. Morbius (and his daughter) to a far-removed edge of the galaxy. Here they will discover that alien technology has invested Morbius with powers so awesome as to seem supernatural. We also find a helpful robot (one of the first movie-robots) and a dangerous, destructive alien presence. 

An interesting modern adaptation whose cast reads like an ’80s movie shout-out was 1982′s The Tempest starring John Cassavetes as a disillusioned architect who deals with a mid-life crisis by fleeing to a remote Greek island with his daughter (Molly Ringwald). Here he meets a brooding shepherd (Caliban: Raul Julia) and an artistic free-spirit (Ariel: Susan Sarandon), and is happy until his evil ex-wife shows up (Gena Rowlands).

The character Prospero is more or less detached from Shakespeare’s play, and recast in Peter Greenaway’s 1991 movie Prospero’s Books. Starring the supreme Prospero (John Gielgud), the movie is an extraordinarily lush, sumptuous visual feast- although a little on the trippy side. Juggler reader Adrian writes provocatively about the work, as an example of a ”film-world,” an independent reality created by the ”objectscape” of a movie. Adrian has some very challenging points to make; please investigate his writing.

Lastly- an American adaptation was NBC’s 1998 The Tempest, starring Peter Fonda as Gideon Prosper, a plantation-owner in the Mississippi bayou who is forced out by his treacherous brother. However- he has learned the use of magic from one of his slaves, which he uses to assist the Union Army.

Is there another Shakespearean character so Archetypal- and so Versatile to Change- as Prospero the Wizard?

 

As The Tempest is a work complex enough to reward considerable study, and as one of the things that I would like to promote here at the Juggler is the idea that there is a Magickal Pagan Cultural Past to be located in The Tempest and similar works:

The most important reason that I would recommend Ms. Taymor’s Tempest to Pagan readers is the moment when Prospera (a game-changing Female Magick-User) conjures a Magicke Circle; all of a sudden, seventeenth century wizardry and modern-day Wiccan practice become one. (I assume that Juggler readers will find this as remarkable as I do; it does occur that Pagan movie-goers will “get” this moment much, much better than Mundanes will, as Pagans automatically think in terms of “Magicke Circles” and such like.)

The Magickal Speech delivered by Prospera as her Circle is Cast derives from the Magickal Speech of the famous Classical Witch Medea (notable as a Priestess to Hecate), adapted from Ovid’s Metamorphoses by Shakespeare. One can argue (therefore) that Medea (Hecate-devotee) and Prospera (Renaissance Maga) become One at this particular moment of the movie.

If you have an interest in understanding these Magickal matters better, please join me after the jump-  Continue reading »

 
temp

I very much enjoyed Julie Taymor’s The Tempest this afternoon, although I oddly feel a little less ”charmed” than I hoped I would. Nonetheless, it is a very good movie-adaptation of this classic, 400-year-old script- notable for recasting the iconic Western culture figure of Prospero the Mage as Helen Mirren. Historic as this innovation is (it opens an entirely new role in the canon to women), and fabulously fierce though Helen Mirren is- the Magicke Circle Scene is the one that Pagans will wish to see the movie for (cause how many movies feature a Magicke Circle at a crucial juncture?)

My point is to make sure that Juggler readers understand- here is a movie, of a seventeenth century play, that has a Magicke Circle in it. I feel this to be significant, if only because it plainly dates the Magickal Circle in English Pop-Culture Magicke understanding, to the seventeenth century.

The cast is uniformly excellent. Alfred Molina and Russell Brand steal the show; Felicity Jones manages to make Miranda a dynamic individual, rather than the passive sort that she usually is. (It is interesting to watch Miranda and her mother, as otherwise the relationships between mothers and daughters are not explored in Shakespeare as much as those between fathers and daughters.)

The colonialist aspects of the Europeans’ relationships with Caliban remain as disturbing as ever; one is struck by how even Prospera orders him around, calling him “slave.” 

The CGI-effects sell the Magicke-Use wonderfully; Ariel is a marvel of a shape-shifting creature, and the interaction between him and Ms. Mirren is rich and complex.

Her Prospera is fantastic, her face almost savage as she rages the eponymous tempest with her staff (there is a neat little moment at the end, where she seems to recognize the fury of her desire for revenge in Caliban). She looks flat-out great, dressed in a kind of bird-feather cloak that is her conjuring robe. (Wasn’t Freyya said to possess a Magickal falcon-robe?)

An unobtrusive little interjection has been added to the back-story, in which Prospera describes her “studies” in the Magickal Arts as the Duchess of Milan, which her treacherous brother twists into accusations of demonism, black magic, and witchcraft (there is a reference to the Burnings).

The Handfasting Scene has been cut, replaced by CGI-effects of the cosmos, and “Now my Charms are all o’erthrown” is performed as a lovely, plaintive ballad as the closing credits roll. It’s nice, but I was kind of hoping to watch Ms. Mirren perform the speech.

The Magicke Circle Scene is fierce (my point being to communicate, go see this movie, for its awesome Magicke Circle Scene). As she draws her Circle in the sand, Prospera begins her invocation: “Ye Elves.” As her Circle whooshes into being in a rush of flames, she begins to describe (echoing Medea from Classical legend)- the feats that she has performed through the Magickal Sciences.

If you’re into seeing the Magicke Circle in movies, you want to see this.

 

Sir John Gielgud, one of the finest Shakespearean actors of the twentieth century, played Prospero the Mage in four separate theatrical productions, as well as in the 1991 movie Prospero’s Books. Here is his interpretation of Prospero’s Epilogue, in which the Wizard protests that he has abandoned Magicke- “his Charms are all o’erthrown,” that is, his Magician’s Skills are vanished. Now he “wants Spirits to enforce, art to enchant”- that is, he lacks what he had previously, namely, Spirits to “enforce” his Magickal Desires, the ”Art” to enchant his Magicke into Being.

He asks- as his rightful dukedom has been restored, and as he has “pardoned the deceiver,” that is, forgiven his usurping brother- for the audience to hold him not confined “in this bare island,” but to “release” him from the Magicke of the play’s spell, by the applause of their hands and by the “breath” of their approving praise.  As you from crimes would pardoned be- let your indulgence set him free.

It is against such actors as Sir John Gielgud, and Maurice Evans, and Patrick Stewart (who played the role on Broadway in the mid-1990s) that Dame Helen Mirren (so honored and ennobled by Her Majesty, Elizabeth II, Queen of England) measures herself, in her ground-breaking turn as “Prospera,” in Julie Taymor’s Tempest- opening today.

 

A thread periodically considered here at The Juggler is what the Pagan Television Network will look like, on the inevitable day when Pagan Television becomes a reality. I would like to nominate as a Pagan Television Classic this delightful production of The Tempest from 1960. This is- as you guessed- a TV version of The Tempest broadcast one year before Mr. Kennedy took office, and it is the best presentation of the play as a Magickal Faerey-Tale that I know of.

Filmed in color (at a time when color television cannot have been common), with special effects that must have been cutting-edge, the program must have looked sumptuous.

The actors are all brilliantly first-rate: Roddy McDowall is a marvelous Ariel; Lee Remick (perhaps best known as Damien’s mom in The Omen), an astonishingly lovely Miranda; Richard Burton, the Shakespearean actor of his generation before he met Elizabeth Taylor and abandoned himself to luxury, a memorable Caliban (played in the traditional interpretation of a fantastic, half-sea-creature monster).

Prospero is performed by one of the great Shakespearean actors of the twentieth century, Maurice Evans (who will otherwise be known to Pagan viewers as Samantha’s dad on Bewitched, as well as Dr. Zaius on Planet of the Apes, and who is magnificent in the part of Prospero- I truly mean it as a compliment when I say, here is a brilliant example of Old School Shakespeare).

Check out how they frame his Magician’s platform against an abstract sculpture of the heavens- the Renaissance Wizard, posed against the cosmic back-drop that is his natural element. Check the Book of Magicke that is mounted on Prospero’s wall, which he studies intently, as well as the crystal ball, in which he scries, and his staff of Magickal Power (note also the robe that he seems to shift into, in response to stage-directions that indicate that Prospero should put on a Wizard’s Garment in order to cast Magicke.) Also please note the twin “goat’s horns” into which Prospero’s beard is twisted.

Section 6/8 will show you the Handfasting; 7/8 “Ye Elves”; and 8/8 the conclusion (note: this production holds off on the “Our Revels Now are Ended” Speech, until the finish, where it serves as Prospero’s farewell).

I am totally enchanted with this altogether delightful valentine of Shakespeare’s most famous Redemption Comedy, and hope that you will be, too. (I do find it poignant that- once- there was an America, in which network producers, during what we call the Mad Men era, assembled actors of this quality, to broadcast a production of The Tempest this fine.)

When do we see television of this caliber anymore?

 

OK, I’m having one of those vexing episodes where I’m trying to link stuff to YouTube examples of The Tempest, for Juggler readers who may wish to familiarize themselves with the play before Julie Taymor’s movie with Helen Mirren (as Prospera the Maga) opens tomorrow, but it’s not working somehow. Maybe Scott can figure it out, but- if you look up “Shakespeare’s The Tempest (1980 TV) Act 4; i (part 1 of 2)” on YouTube- you can check out the Handfasting Scene (Act IV) from the BBC Shakespeare series’ 1980 broadcast, wherein the Union of Miranda and Ferdinand is blessed by the Roman Goddesses Juno and Ceres (led forth by Iris); a celebration-ballet between Nymphs and half-dressed Field-Working Guys follows, concluded by ”Our revels now are ended.”   

Then- and you kind of have to sit through one of those comic scenes where Caliban (that rough, hairy fellow) is trying to persuade the two comic servants to kill Prospero (comedy, for some reason, translates less well in Shakespeare)- but then, under “Shakespeare’s The Tempest (1980 TV) Act 4; i (part 2 of 2)”- you see Prospero (with Ariel kind of acting as his higher conscience) resolve to be forgiving and merciful with his enemies- and deliver the “Ye Elves” speech.

You may notice that Prospero does not actually Cast a Circle during this performance of the speech, even though there is a stage-direction immediately after the speech referring to the “Circle that Prospero has made.” I figure that (1) BBC Shakespeare did not want the actor to turn his back to the camera by turning in a circle, or/and (2) they just didn’t get what the stage-direction referring to the “Circle that Prospero has made” means. I figure that nowadays you pretty much have to be a Wiccan or a Neo-Pagan to “get” a Magicke Circle; therefore, I guess even BBC Shakespeare- for all that Shakespeare presents a Magicke Circle in Henry VI; Marlowe does in Faustus; Barnes, in The Devil’s Charter (twice); and Jonson references the Circle in The Alchemist- not even BBC Shakespeare “gets” what a Magicke Circle means anymore (or at least they didn’t in 1980).

 

Prospero’s “Ye Elves of hills, brooks, standing lakes, and groves” speech, from the top of Act 5 in The Tempest, is derived from Medea’s Speech of Witchcraft in Ovid’s Metamorphoses. While an English translation of Ovid was available at the time, it is clear that Shakespeare (like every other educated English-person of the period) was fluent in Latin (at times in his various plays, he appears to be translating Latin spontaneously); I imagine that he was actually more familiar with Metamorphoses in Latin, than through the English translation.

While “Elves,” to our minds, would seem to be cousins to Faereys and Leprechauns- “Elf” (Alf) is an Anglo-Saxon word denoting a “supernatural or inhabiting Spirit”; therefore, “Elves of hills, brooks, etc.” is Prospero’s invocation to the Nature Spirits of the Wild Regions around him.

While it might seem as if Shakespeare is cribbing or copying from Ovid, I think the reality is a little more nuanced. Particularly if the acting company is expecting (as I think they must have been) to present the play at court- where everybody else present will be both fluent in Latin and (undoubtedly) familiar as well with Ovid (and therefore Medea’s speech)- Shakespeare must expect that his audience will recognize the speech instantly (associating it with both Medea and Witchcraft).

That is, when Prospero begins to perform “Ye Elves,” the audience is immediately going to “get” and “pick up on” the fact that, here is that famous Witchcraft Speech from Ovid, which we all know very well.

There is going to be a sub-textual level to the performance of the speech, as the entire assembly (which includes the king) attends to Prospero’s enacting this Magickal Invocation- which (for being so Ancient) they would have held to be especially Powerful, and (more to the point) very, very telling in ascribing the Might of Witchcraft, and very Authoritative for the Greatness of its legacy.

However controversial Witchcraft may have become by James’s time- they understood it as an Art found in the Ancient World as well as in their own period. The Medea sections found in Ovid were an important reference for them, as to understanding Witchcraft in the Roman world.  

By choosing Medea’s speech as the basis for Prospero’s, I believe that Shakespeare is putting the Imprimatur of Authority (as it were) upon it: he is signalling to his audience that Prospero is such a Great Mage, he can wield the Powers of Medea.

Since they onviously found onstage Magicke and/or Witchcrafte to be exciting- there must have been a huge thrill-factor involved in watching Medea’s Witchery Speech acted out.

It must have read a bit like a “shout-out” to one of the Greatest Hits of Sorcery Incantation ever. It subliminally reinforces the notion of Prospero as a serious Magick-Using Mage: look, he’s so powerful, he commands the Power of Medea. And it cements the idea of Prospero being very learned, as he is erudite enough to know Ovid, and adept enough to adapt Medea’s invocation to his own end.

All posts are the copyright of the individual authors. Suffusion theme by Sayontan Sinha