Slog News & Arts

Line Out

Music & Nightlife

« Basketball Court Day 2: The Be... | Dunn vs. Dunn »

Tuesday, June 17, 2008

If You’re Going to Get All Shakespearean On Our Asses, Dwight…

posted by on June 17 at 14:20 PM

…do try to get it right. Dismissing the complaints of die-hard Clinton supporters, Dwight Pelz described their gripes to Eli as…

“…sound and fury which signifieth little.”

Lots of people—particularly politicians—like to work a Shakespeare reference into their public statements because, you know, it sounds so damn smart. But there’s nothing smart about botching the reference and making Shakespeare’s language seem more elaborate and archaic than it actually is. Most of the prose and poetry in Shakespeare’s plays is remarkably clear, straightforward, and direct. So while that “signifieth” of Dwight’s sounds all Elizabethan and shit, not only is the third-person singular present simple form of “signify” archaic as hell, it’s not the word that Shakespeare himself used.

Informed in Act V that the queen, his wife, is dead, Macbeth responds…

She should have died hereafter;
There would have been a time for such a word.
To-morrow, and to-morrow, and to-morrow,
Creeps in this petty pace from day to day
To the last syllable of recorded time,
And all our yesterdays have lighted fools
The way to dusty death. Out, out, brief candle!
Life’s but a walking shadow, a poor player
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage
And then is heard no more: it is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.

If “signifying” was good enough for Shakespeare, Dwight, it ought to be good enough for you. And why leave off the best part of the line? The next time someone asks you about those Clinton dead-enders, Dwight, you can quote Shakespeare and call ‘em names. Just smile and say…

Tales told by idiots, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.

RSS icon Comments

1

You'll have to forgive him, he knoweth not what he does.

Posted by Will in Seattle | June 17, 2008 2:22 PM
2

Eh. Give the guy a break. I'm sure this was an off-the-cuff comment. Reporters and the media make too much of such things, all the while, they get to practice their art in a highly-edited format. Not comparable.

Posted by Timothy | June 17, 2008 2:24 PM
3

Eh. Give the guy a break. I'm sure this was an off-the-cuff comment. Reporters and the media make too much of such things, all the while, they get to practice their art in a highly-edited format. Not comparable.

Posted by Timothy | June 17, 2008 2:25 PM
4

Lord, what fools these mortals be!

Hugs Dan.

Posted by PopTart | June 17, 2008 2:27 PM
5

No don't give the guy a break. That is one of the greatest quotable quotes of all time and there is no excuse or forgiveness.

Posted by kid icarus | June 17, 2008 2:28 PM
6

To beith or, not to beith a jackass. That is the questioneth.

Posted by boxofbirds | June 17, 2008 2:38 PM
7

In a related story, the next person I hear say "methinks the lady doth protest too much" gets a punch in the face.

Posted by Chris in Tampa | June 17, 2008 2:42 PM
8

What's done is done--that it should come to this!

Posted by NapoleonXIV | June 17, 2008 2:48 PM
9

Oh, Dan, how parsimonious of you.

But, seriously, it was off the cuff man. Screw Shakespeare (but, also, damn that passage is pretty to read).

Posted by Sam | June 17, 2008 2:55 PM
10

Methinks the homo doth protest too much.

Posted by w7ngman | June 17, 2008 2:57 PM
11

Are you sure it wasn't the reporter who screwed up the quote? I've been in the paper a few times and have been surprised by the things I supposedly said.

Posted by Schweighsr | June 17, 2008 3:01 PM
12

You know, Dan, one of these days you're going to misquote someone, and I'm going land on you like a sumo wrestler.

Posted by Frasier Crane | June 17, 2008 3:01 PM
13

Erm, except Shakespeare didn't use "which"... I'm not so sure "which signifieth" is wrong.
Unless you're assuming that he was making a direct reference to the passage. I doubt he was, just being on-the-fly archaic.

Posted by Mr Fuzzy | June 17, 2008 3:11 PM
14

Oh wait. I eat my words and apologies. The "sound and fury" didn't register the first time around.

Posted by Mr Fuzzy | June 17, 2008 3:13 PM
15

apologize*
I apologize again.

Posted by Mr Fuzzy | June 17, 2008 3:15 PM
16

You do realize that Shakespeare didn't invent the English language, right? And maybe you've heard of this nifty literary device called an "allusion"?

Perhaps Pelz got Kiley's memo that blind reverence of Shakespeare is very, very lame and, in sparing Brendan's delicate sensibilites, trampled yours. Poor dears, all of you.

Posted by Lola | June 17, 2008 3:17 PM
17

Ah a wanna-be elitist who doesn't have shit to say.

Posted by Odrama | June 17, 2008 3:33 PM
18

Yeah. And, once, I noticed a blogger has a misspelling. And questionable grammar. A commenter did too. Once. Twice maybe. Even.

Q: Is this Pelzy's scribbling or a transcription?

Posted by umvue | June 17, 2008 3:44 PM
19

Olde English, Motherfuckre, dost thou speake it?

Posted by NapoleonXIV | June 17, 2008 3:53 PM
20

he lost me at "signifieth".... If he had said "signifying little," that would have been clever instead of hackneyed. But I do really appreciate the internal rhyme of that line, which is a great example of consonance

Posted by jackseattle | June 17, 2008 4:07 PM
21

@19: There hast thou mowderne English, jack-asse; get thee to a library.

Oh, and Dan: according to the first folio, the quote is:

"It is a Tale / Told by an Ideot, full of found and fury / Signifying nothing."

Posted by Greg | June 17, 2008 4:31 PM
22

as a note, he didn't even want the singular form; "sound and fury" call for the plural form: sound and fury signify little.

Posted by raff i el | June 17, 2008 4:52 PM
23

Methinks Chris doth protest too much.

Posted by Will in Seattle | June 17, 2008 5:04 PM
24

@12, aw c'mon, we all make mistakes. Even about the war.

Posted by CP | June 17, 2008 5:50 PM

Comments Closed

Comments are closed on this post.