Calphurnia and Portia: Rome’s Unwanted Women

January 21, 2013 Alex Matsuo

Okay, back to business. No more paranormal for a while and back to research!

Julius Caesar is a play that is suspended between the realms of history and tragedy. The play is male–dominated, with only two women roles: Calphurnia, Caesar’s wife, and Portia, Brutus’ wife. The lack of female presence is noticed in comparison to other Shakespeare plays where female roles are favorable, such as Twelfth Night, As You Like It, and The Merry Wives of Windsor. David Mann discusses in Shakespeare’s Women, “Why should one play, say As You Like It, seem so sensitive to the minutiae of a woman’s feelings, and yet another, say Julius Caesar, be so cursory in its treatment? The answer surely is that it depends entirely on the focus of the play, which, with the exception of a small group of romantic comedies, is generally on the male characters, and always reflects the male point of view” (Mann 23). Shakespeare created the absence of a strong female role in order to prove the tragic flaw of an ambitious, male dominated world in terms of Julius Caesar.

It is important to analyze the actions and choices that are made by these men in their world. Gail Kern Paster elaborates in the essay, “In the Spirit of Men There Is No Blood: Blood as Trope of Gender in Julius Caesar,” “The conspirators can only remake themselves, it would seem, by regendering Caesar; they can throw off the appearance of womanishness by displacing their own sense of gender-indeterminacy onto the body of their adversary and renegotiating the differences between themselves and Caesar in diacritical terms of the bodily canons” (290). This quote touches on a common insecurity among the men of the Senate. They are envious and fearful of Caesar’s growing power. In relation to the weak female roles of the play, the men themselves do not want to appear weak and feminine because then they will be overpowered. There is also the fear of being overruled by emotions and not being able to think rationally because of these emotions. As Cassius states:

Let it be who it is: for Romans now
Have thews and limbs like to their ancestors;
But, woe the while! our fathers’ minds are dead,
And we are govern’d with our mothers‘ spirits;
Our yoke and sufferance show us womanish. –I, ii, 79-83. Emphasis Added.

This is also proven when Caesar is being attacked over his inability to impregnate Calphurnia and even requests Antony to brush by her to make her more fertile, “Forget not, in your speed, Antonius, /To touch Calphurnia; for our elders say, /The barren, touched in this holy chase, /Shake off their sterile curse. (I, ii, 10-13). Paster also explains an interesting point that the more Caesar grows, the conspirators (or the Senate) shrink. They must assassinate Caesar in order to secure their own masculinity.

When analyzing Caesar and Brutus and their own personal downfalls, one must look at their wives and their relationships with them. These two ladies serve as a point of reasons and foundations for their husbands even though their warnings are not heeded. Also, this play conveys an interesting point of view into a world without a female presence. Or to be put more plainly, a civilization without women. In this play, it seems that the two marriages are related into more of a partnership, as shown in the strength of these two women. Calphurnia is so alarmed by her dream that she strongly urges Caesar to stay at home. She is outspoken and clearly has a personality and self-made identity. She warns Caesar and tells him to not go to the Senate. Her statement, “You shall not stir out of your house today” (II, ii, 13) is written as a direct order and not a request. Instead, Caesar listens to Decius’ alternate interpretation of her dream, which leads to his downfall. Juliet Dusinberre elaborates in her book, Shakespeare and the Nature of Women, “Shakespeare’s women dream and see visions in vain, surviving to suffer the devastation they predict. Decius interprets Calphurnia’s dream to flatter Caesar, and sketches the scorn which would attend his hearkening to his wife’s fears…” (Dusinberre 281).

To Caesar, he doesn’t heed Calphurnia’s warnings and nightmares because they are subjective. Based on her womanly role and femininity, she is working primarily from emotions. Instead, he believes in Decius’ interpretation and chooses to not lie to the Senate or the people regarding the condition of his health. He is murdered due to this choice. But another reason why Caesar considers Decius’ interpretation of the dream is because it flatters his own personal confidence. If he [Caesar] followed Calphurnia’s orders and lied to the Senate and stayed home, Caesar would have seen this as him not following through with his appointed role. Decius’ interpretation was not only more persuasive, but also encouraged Caesar to continue to the Senate and walk into his own death sentence.

Similar to Calphurnia, Portia is determined to make sure her voice is heard and understood. Portia goes a step further as she expects Brutus to be completely honest with her. She desires a partnership with her husband and wants to be involved in his life. Not only do these two share a partnership, but also Portia considers herself to be an extension of Brutus himself. But he ignores her at first, thinking that she could not handle the real truth of his life and work. But Portia is extremely intelligent and has the ability to use language to aid her to get what she desires:

BRUTUS: You are my true and honourable wife,
As dear to me as are the ruddy drops
That visit my sad heart

PORTIA: If this were true, then should I know this secret.
I grant I am a woman; but withal
A woman that Lord Brutus took to wife:
I grant I am a woman; but withal
A woman well-reputed, Cato’s daughter.
Think you I am no stronger than my sex,
Being so father’d and so husbanded?
Tell me your counsels, I will not disclose ’em:
I have made strong proof of my constancy,
Giving myself a voluntary wound
Here, in the thigh: can I bear that with patience.
And not my husband’s secrets? – II, i, 287-301

Portia challenges Brutus’ love for her. If Brutus sees Portia as a comfort from his troubles, then he should be able to tell her of the conspiracy. But he doesn’t and Portia uses logic and reason to explain her position as the wife of Brutus. Portia’s voluntary wound is a representation of her strength and endurance as a woman in a man’s world. Paster explains the voluntary wound as, “Portia calls attention to this bodily site not to remind Brutus of her femaleness, her lack of the phallus, but rather to offer the wound as substitute phallus” (294). She purposely inflicted pain and injury onto herself in order to prove a physical strength that was masculine and the physical cut would serve as that proof, just as a male sexual part is proof of “manliness”. She considers herself to be nearly like a man from her strong father who raised her, to Brutus, her husband.

Portia intentionally wounds herself to prove that she is just as strong as a man. Paster discusses that, “Later in the same scene, Portia’s self-wounding and voluntary self-display corroborate the same significance of bodily intactness as an ideological format of gender. Portia stakes her claim to knowledge of the conspiracy by seeking to efface the physical difference that separates her from her husband, difference that Brutus himself is intent upon marking” (292). This means that Portia’s desire to know about the conspiracy is so strong, that she intentionally wounded herself to rid herself of any signs of being a woman. She is attempting to mutilate herself in order to be physically just like a man.

The actual action of this self-wound is significant because she is attempting to prove a point to her husband. Paster goes on to explain that, “But Portia, unable by talking to prove her ability to keep still, turns to self-mutilation. The gesture seems intended to imitate in little the suicides that Roman patriarchy valorized as the supreme expression of personal autonomy” (293). But Portia desires more than just to know about the conspiracy, she desires an equal partnership with her husband. If she can prove that she can physically handle pain and to literally carve herself into a man, it will grant her that partnership. Unfortunately, only so much can be done physically when her emotional state does not change genders.

Her emotional and mental state remains feminine. Similarly, Brutus himself demonstrates a flawed understanding of human emotion. Honor Matthews explains in Character and Symbol in Shakespeare’s Plays, “Both before and after the assassination he suffers sleeplessness typical of a troubled conscience […] Nevertheless, he strives to be honest with himself and others; he is idealistic, a loving husband an adored master. Indeed Brutus’ true ‘sin’ is never wrongful self-assertion.” (Matthews 43). This statement is interesting because it puts Brutus in more of a heroic position rather than a troubled conspirator who doesn’t know how to handle loss or failure. This is supported by Antony’s speech in the end of the play where he regards Brutus as the only assassin who killed Caesar with Rome’s best interest at hear, “ This was the noblest Roman of them all;/ All the conspirators save only he/Did that they did in envy of great Caesar…” (V, v, 76-78).

There is an interesting point to consider in the scene where Brutus finds out about the suicide of his wife. The news is delivered twice and both times Brutus is emotionally distant and unattached to the event. And Cassius is more affected by Portia’s death than Brutus himself. Portia’s suicide, however, is not a sign of weakness. David Mann explains that, “The values of the Roman matron are held up for admiration in many of the plays and are closely related to the willingness of such to commit suicide to maintain their reputations” (Mann 138). This is supported by Brutus’s suicide after he has begun to lose the war. Could this mean that Portia ultimately failed in attempting to be her husband’s partner and equal? But the absence of Portia supplements a catalyst for his spiraling downfall into his own death.

Thomas Clayton explains in his text, Should Brutus Never Taste of Portia’s Death but Once, “The latter part of the play shows him characteristically and nobly enduring the consequences of his earlier folly even as he compounds it” (Clayton 244). Brutus’ slow deterioration is due to his actions. His initial motivation for taking part in the assassination of Caesar involved a patriotic act but soon realized the consequences both mentally and physically. As seen in his unaffected reaction to Portia’s suicide, Brutus does not have a good handle on his own emotions. Dunsinberre explains that, “Nevertheless, commanding his own emotions, Brutus underestimates the way in which other men are swayed by theirs. Brutus may have more integrity than Antony but he is obtuse about passions which Antony understands” (Dusinberre 290).

Brutus’s disconnection from stable human emotions is his tragic flaw. As those around him are reacting [healthily] to the events around them, Brutus does not comprehend which emotion to use. Could it be that he emotionally shut down as soon as Caesar was killed? Or did he disable his emotions to thwart the efforts of Portia’s insistence of knowing her husband’s secrets? Clayton goes on to say, “There is no mistakening Brutus’s dissembling, and yet it does not register as discreditable, because of the mood and level of exchange, the residual effect of Brutus’s grief manifested to Cassius when Brutus told him of Portia’s death, and Brutus’s evident – it is more apparent – sincerity” (Clayton 251).

There are only two small roles for women in the play. Calphurnia only makes a brief appearance and sternly tells her husband to stay home because of her vivid (and prophetic) dream. Caesar simply puts Calphurnia’s concerns aside and instead listens to Decius’ alternate interpretation of the dream because it was more appealing and positive. Listening to Calphurnia would have resulted in moral repercussions in his role as a leader and his reputation. But not listening to Calphurnia resulted in his assassination by the Senate.

Meanwhile, Portia attempts to prove her role as an equal to Brutus. Her desires to know the conspiracy of the Senate are much more than the pursuit of knowledge. It is an attempt to become the extension of her husband and to have that partnership that her emotional state hungers for. Even though she is attempting to prove her worthiness by physically mutilating herself into becoming a man, her emotional state remains as a woman. Her suicide is resulted from Antony and Octavius’s rise to power and realizing that the Senate’s conspiracy plan has ultimately become a failure. Even though she commits suicide first, Brutus is not too far behind her. Both husband and wife demonstrate an emotional disability and to preserve their honors, they commit suicide.

Shakespeare wrote Julius Caesar as a way to convey the absence of a strong female role in a male dominated world and the consequences of ambition. Calphurnia demonstrates strength in her when she demands that Caesar lie to the Senate and stay home with her to ensure his safety. But the attempt is counter-argued by a stronger male presence in her life. This ignorance on Caesar’s part leads to his death. Portia desires an equal relationship with her husband, and while she can handle the physical pain and demands of a man, she cannot handle the emotional demands of being a man. Even though she may self-mutilate a phallus onto herself, she cannot change on the inside. Both women are neglected and ignored. They are unwanted women. No matter what actions they may have performed or words they may have spoken, they did not have the power to change the story or fate of their husbands.

Bibliography

Clayton, Thomas. “‘Should Brutus Never Taste of Portia’s Death but Once?’ Text and Performance in Julius Caesar.” Studies in English Literature (Rice) 23.2 (1983): 237. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Web. 27 Apr. 2010.

Dunsinberre, Juliet. Shakespeare and the Nature of Women. New York: St. Martin’s Press. 1996. Print.

Mann, David. Shakespeare’s Women. New York: Cambridge University Press. 2008. Print.

Marshall, Cynthia. “Portia’s Wound, Calphurnia’s Dream: Reading Character in Julius Caesar.” English Literary Renaissance 24.2 (1994): 471-87. Print.

Matthews, Honor. Character and Symbol in Shakespeare’s Plays. New York: Cambridge University Press. 1962. Print.

Paster, Gail Kern. “”In the Spirit of Men There Is No Blood”: Blood as Trope of Gender in Julius Caesar.” Shakespeare Quarterly 40.3 (1989): 284. Print.

Rebhorn, Wayne A. “The Crisis of the Aristocracy in Julius Caesar.” Renaissance Quarterly 43.1 (1990): 75-111. JSTOR. Web. 6 Apr. 2010. <http://www.jstor.org/stable/2861793>

Shakespeare, William. Riverside Shakespeare. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1997. Print.

Smith, Warren D. “The Duplicate Revelation of Portia’s Death.” Shakespeare Quarterly 4.2 (1953): 153-61. Print.

How Do You Want to Represent the Paranormal Field?

January 20, 2013 Alex Matsuo

Let me make this very clear:

I am not writing this as the director of the Association of Paranormal Study.

I am writing this as a member of the paranormal community, and I claim responsibility for my statements. If you disagree with anything, do not take it out on APS. You all can comment on this blog or email me. I’m fairly certain that those who disagree with me will investigate me, discredit me, etc. and that’s fine. Do what you will, and have fun. If my words offend you, please take a moment and think about why. Then put me on full blast. I’m ready for it. I will be respectful to you. Comments with bad language that don’t make any grammatical sense will not get a response.

I usually reserve this blog for my theatrical research and my life outside of the paranormal field. Since these are my words alone, and I want these words to have no association with any group I am a part of, I made the difficult decision to put it here. Does it mean that you’ll start seeing paranormal related posts on this website? No. At least not until I want to remain independent when it comes to an opinion and avoid hurting any of my associates.

The fact that I even have to do this is absurd, which leads me into the topic of this blog: How do you want to represent the paranormal field? This is an honest question. In what direction do you want to see the paranormal field head?

The first thing I need to hash out are the words paraunity, paracommunity, parafamily, and any other “para” play-on-words you can think of that basically means, “Hey, we are into the paranormal and we love each other because no one else understands us.” Ever since I “officially” joined this community, I’ve been given the speech about coming together as a community and how we all need to stick together. As fine and dandy as that it is, I don’t think everyone really knows what they want with “paraunity.” This term is used to define a sense of family, togetherness, and unification towards a common cause. We can all joke with ourselves and say paraunity exists, but in related it does not…at least not on a large scale. And it’s time that the paranormal community sits in the hot seat and goes on time out.

ORIGINS

I have been a researcher of the paranormal since I was a teenager. Even in the age of the Internet, I utilized my library and being an introvert whose too emotional, I took solace in books and being by myself. I didn’t intentionally avoid the paranormal community until I was in college. I even investigated by myself, taking what I learned in these books and putting it to action. I wanted to understand my own experiences and try to recreate them for validation. I did this by myself as a loner. I didn’t connect with any teams or reach out to anyone on the Internet. I was truly alone.

Now that I’m in my mid-late twenties and out of graduate school and officially an “adult”, I finally had time to get on the Internet and find out what was out there in terms of the paranormal. I joined a bunch of online groups and forums, started taking online webinars to help my own research and learn new things, and finally, network.

LESS RESEARCH, MORE DRAMA

As my journey as an outsider transitioned to an insider of the community, I started noticing truly disgusting things about the paranormal community; blatant lying, trash talking, faking evidence, and more. Was this really coming from the same people who promoted paraunity and parafamily? I was floored. Immediately, I became blacklisted by certain people for having different views or questioning things. You would have thought I robbed their house or beat up their child at school. And as I moved up the ranks in a well-known paranormal team, I discovered rumors being spread about me and why I got to where I was, and just plain lies. I saw colleagues and friends being publicly humiliated on Facebook and having lies being spread about them because they questioned evidence. I saw a widower publicly mocked and called a fraud for having his “feelings hurt” after his wife died and criticizing him because he wanted to start an organization about paranormal safety (that one still makes me sick to my stomach). I also saw those new to the field and not as well researched in the field get publicly blasted for posting bad evidence. I saw name-calling, swearing, and disrespect. It felt like I was on a bad reality TV show that made the Jersey Shore look like Emmy Award-winning entertainment.

And yet these are the same people calling for unity and wanting to further the field of the paranormal into a serious field.

I will be honest. I believe the idea of family and unity in the paranormal community is a myth. It’s something that people hide behind. The term gives people a false sense of security, as they confide with strangers about their paranormal experiences and disclosing intimate details about their personal lives, which that stranger can abuse in the future. It’s really pessimistic of me to think this, but I’ve had people in the community abuse my confidence. Now, there are people are really alone in their lives and they have no one else to talk to, and if they get lucky and find someone out there who can help them, great! These people that I just described are the victims. They are the innocent bystanders who watch this drama between the seasoned investigators and experts and they are the ones who decide they won’t deal with it and they leave. That is the biggest loss in the paranormal community. They are the ones who are the most heartbroken when things fall apart. I advise these people to be careful of who you talk to and how much information you disclose to strangers on the Internet. I’ve had people be completely nice to me to my face and then turn around and say the nastiest things about me. I’ve had people pretend to be my friend in attempts to get information out of me. I’ve had people blame me for their mistakes or literally, frame me. I’ve had people cut me off because of what someone else said to them about me. Sounds like something out of a daytime drama.

HOW DO YOU REPRESENT THE PARANORMAL?

There are many investigators who want the paranormal field to be respected by fellow researchers and scientists in the world. But let me ask you this, do you actions reflect your professionalism? When you rip someone apart on Facebook while using vulgar language, is that how YOU want to REPRESENT the paranormal community? It seems as though those who are more in the spotlight get attacked the most. Is that because of jealousy? Is it because they are more in the hot seat than other teams? I don’t know. And it’s not my place to speak for those people. But we need to look at our actions as paranormal investigators and decide, do my actions further this field or make it go backwards? Do the things I post on my team’s page show that I should be taken seriously as an investigator? And for those who are pursuing more exposure through radio, television, film, and online broadcasting, you have a bigger responsibility because you will be more accessible to the public eye. And do your actions reflect the field in a professional and positive light?

Also, the more exposure you get, you’re going to get criticized. Be prepared to deal with it and handle it with class and grace. As someone very wise once told me, “Don’t dish it if you can’t take it.” Playing victim doesn’t help your case either. If you are only producing defensive rants on your pages instead of quality paranormal research findings, you are not positively contributing to the field. When you are approached with criticism (constructive or…less constructive), how do you react? Your reactions dictate your maturity level and how open you are to criticism.

It seems as though certain investigators and teams seem to think that the only way that they can get credibility and fame is to rip apart another team. There are websites and Facebook pages out there dedicated to exposing frauds in the paranormal. The first image that came to mind was someone being condemned to the stocks in medieval times. Granted, there are teams out there intentionally faking their evidence, and they should be held accountable for their actions, and there are very qualified people out there to do it. But sometimes teams post bad evidence out of ignorance. It happens. They might be new to the field or exhaustion got the best of them. Do they deserve to be humiliated and embarrassed? No. In those cases, any hope of a learning experience or a teachable moment is gone. There are ways to expose fraud in the paranormal with your reputation in tact and making it a teachable moment. It requires a little extra research and actually talking to the guilty team, but are you willing to put out that energy?

But then, as I looked at these sites and groups, I noticed that they are starting to attack groups for holding events, making films, or just even existing. I was astonished. Bt the worst part was, they are using such poor grammar and language. Call me a prude, but I take a lot of value and highly respect someone who can express their case with classy language. Calling people “fucktards”, “tards”, “assholes”, “douchebags”, “motherfuckers”, doesn’t impress me, and I’m sure it doesn’t impress others. Again, this all goes back to how YOU want to REPRESENT the paranormal field.

Also, these sites are calling for people to call the attorney general, the police department, etc. Okay, if there’s no real fraud happening and you don’t have hardcore confirmation, please don’t waste taxpayer money. Witness testimony is flawed. People lie, embellish and exaggerate on purpose. Memory is unreliable. And to be honest, it’s easy to part a fool from their money. There. I said it. If someone is willing to pay a psychic $500 to tell them the things they already know. Fine. If someone is willing to use a team that charges to investigate. Fine. It’s going to happen, and we all need to get over it. I don’t like it as much as the next person. But I’ve found that calling people out only creates animosity, hurt, and anger, and it doesn’t do anything to create a solution. You know what you can do to combat this. Promote the fact that there are teams who don’t charge.

MORE RESEARCH, LESS DRAMA

Why spotlight the negativity and the frauds? Why is there no [popular] place to praise and showcase the investigators and teams who are doing great things to further the field? Why is the negative getting all of the attention? The best thing you can do to the people you believe to be frauds is not call any attention to them and let them be forgotten. Let the legacy of those who are making positive contributions get the glory and the attention and let them get the immortality.

Also, let’s face it, next to photography; paranormal investigation is probably one of the most expensive hobbies out there. Unless you have a TV show, a book, etc. that is making you income. But for the majority, this is a hobby for many; a hobby that people work their jobs to support, a hobby that people must be really passionate about. It’s actually more than a hobby; it’s a way of life. So why are we wasting our time promoting the negative, the fakes, while using cursing to try to get our point across? Why can’t we all just get along? Live and let live. Leave the other teams alone. Use that energy to raise the standards of paranormal investigating by leading by example. And if your colleague gets a TV show, a job in the field, etc. Be happy for them and support them. If your colleague disagrees with you on a topic, brush it off, discuss it, and move on. Paraunity isn’t the idea that everyone agrees with the same thing, it’s the mutual understand and mutual respect of each other, even if you don’t agree with them.

Unfortunately, I am a realist, and nothing can ever be universal. This dream and hope of paraunity will likely never exist on a large plane. I believe it can exist in more smaller, isolated groups…like paranormal teams. I think the first step towards any kind of large-scale community is to all agree to disagree, and knowing that it is okay to do so.

THE DEPARTING OF THE FINEST

I’ve noticed a mass exodus of quality researchers from the paranormal community because of the drama and how disgusting people can act in this field. They don’t want any association with the community anymore. I don’t blame them. Drama is a waste of time and a big distraction. Why is it that we have to lose the good ones and let the bad ones stay? Again, this all goes back the attention on the negative and not the positive. We are the ones creating this community, and it is up to us to decide how the reputation of that community will be viewed. Will strangers look at the paranormal field and say, “What a bunch of immature drama queens.”? Or will they say, “Wow, they have a lot of interesting things to say.” Or even, “Wow, they’re really professional.”

My hope for the paranormal community is not unification, it is my hope that we will all have exceptionally high standards when it comes to investigating, so that finally, this field can be taken seriously. We can question things in a professional manner, and set ourselves apart from those who are fraudulent and less professional. Separate the big leagues from the minor leagues.

I wish you all safety, positivity and good luck in all of your endeavors.

A “Brief” Rant About the Oxfordian Theory of Shakespeare’s Authorship

January 4, 2013 Alex Matsuo

Most people know that I’m very much obsessed with Shakespeare. I studied his work quite immensely in undergraduate and graduate school, and I still conduct research for my own personal endeavors. I’m by no means an expert, while some disagree (aw, shucks). But I can work my way out of paper bag when it comes to Shakespeare.

I think one of my biggest pet peeves is the authorship debate. I’m open-minded to different theories as long as they can support their case with good research. However, speaking out to question Shakespeare’s authorship without anything to support your claims infuriates me. But at the same time, there is nothing better than debunking claims…

…especially when it comes to the Oxfordian theory.

For those of you who don’t know, the Oxfordian theory is the theory that Edward de Vere, the 17th Earl of Oxford actually authored Shakespeare’s works. In fact, you might be familiar with a certain movie that came out last year, “Anonymous”, which is loosely based on this theory. My problems with that movie can make up a whole other blog post (especially when they convey the “real” Shakespeare as nothing more than a bumbling idiot).

The Oxfordian theory has been rejected by most experts and scholars in the field. There are obvious flaws to it. There is no evidence, at least scientific evidence in carbon dating along with tangible proof, that there was any connection between Shakespeare and de Vere. “Oxfordians” reject the methods that historians have used to make their case, and unless you’re “in the loop”, you couldn’t possibly understand how de Vere could be the actual author of Shakespeare’s works.

The Oxfordian theory especially loses when it comes to the plays and sonnets that were written AFTER Edward de Vere passed away in 1604. Keep in mind that Shakespeare passed away in 1616. And not to mention that many of Shakespeare’s plays that were written and performed post-1604 had references to post-1604 events, after Edward de Vere died.

King Lear was written between 1603 and 1606 and first performed in front of the court of King James I on December 26th, 1606.

Timon of Athens was first performed between 1607 and 1608.

Coriolanus was believed to have been written between 1605 and 1608, and the opening scenes of the play (the grain riots) are believed to be a reference to the Midland Revolt and the Inquisition of Depopulation of 1607. An event that Edward de Vere could not have foreseen unless he could predict the future.

Antony and Cleopatra was written and performed around 1606.

Macbeth was believed to have been written around 1606 while the play’s first performance was in 1611.

The Tempest was written around 1610/1611 with its first performance in 1611 and is most famous for being Shakespeare’s last written play.

Henry VIII is probably the most questionable one when it comes to dating and whether it was actually written by Shakespeare (Oxfordian theory aside….Ben Jonson anyone?). Most date the play to have been written around 1613.

And then we have the wonderful sonnets that were being written long after 1604. Some are even dated to have been written up to 1621.

Wait…didn’t Will die in 1616?

Yes, he did. And keep in mind that I am not bashing ALL authorship theories, just the Oxfordian because it is the most ridiculous and yet seems to have the largest following. There are authorship theories that I will give credit to. While I consider myself to be a lover of Shakespeare, I would be a fool to believe that Shakespeare wrote all of his stuff. There is clear evidence of manuscripts and certain sections of the plays that are considered to be “un-Shakespearean.” Well, we have to ultimately decide, what is Shakespeare? We are dependent on centuries old documents and it’s hard to decipher what we really have that is authentic or not.

Back to topic.

Here is a list of theories that suggest Shakespeare was a fraud and my rebuttals against them.

This was inspired by Roland Emmerich’s video with his explanation as to why Shakespeare was a fraud. Watch it first, and then read below.

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zXhR0PFLkqs]

We have no documented evidence of anything done in Shakespeare’s handwriting.

Actually, yes we do. We have his revisions he had done to the play of Sir Thomas More by Anthony Munday. Sir Thomas More has been concluded that it was written by several authors with each author labeled with the name “Hand” and then a letter following the name. There are about three pages of Sir Thomas More that are accepted as being written by Shakespeare’s hand, known as “Hand D.” The handwriting was similar to the existing signatures of Shakespeare as well as similar verse structure as his other works. And not to mention similar spelling characteristics that were deemed “Shakespearean.”

In reference to the six shaky signatures of Shakespeare, back then, penmanship was atrocious in general. The Earl of Leicester, Robert Dudley’s, love letters to the Queen makes the doctors’ handwriting look like calligraphy.

Also, keep in mind that even know Shakespeare is now a famous figure, back in his time, he was a commoner. And we rarely, if ever, have personal correspondence from commoners. All we really have are some royal love letters because the Vatican got a hold of them somehow.

Shakespeare’s daughters couldn’t read or write.

Unless you were a wealthy woman, female commoners didn’t read or write and certainly did not attend school. And let’s not forget that Shakespeare was very much absent from the lives of his wife, Anne Hathaway, and their daughters.

Shakespeare wrote about the aristocracy and showed he had extensive knowledge while Ben Jonson wrote about the people he knew; the common people.

First off, Ben Jonson was hardly the view of the people. He was not very well liked as a playwright and he is known to have been a jerk. Second, the only plays that dealt with the English royalty were the history plays which he took from Hollinshed’s Chronicles, he didn’t gain from personal knowledge. Also, it was very common back in the day to write favorably about the aristocracy, and Elizabeth was known to be a supporter and patron to Shakespeare. Write for your audience. Also, Shakespeare did appeal to the commoners, the groundlings didn’t attend his plays because they were forced to.

Shakespeare doesn’t mention the death of his 11-year old son in any of his works. How can a writer who writes from his heart and soul never mention this?

I believe sonnet #33 debunks this theory:

Full many a glorious morning have I seen
Flatter the mountain-tops with sovereign eye,
Kissing with golden face the meadows green,
Gilding pale streams with heavenly alchemy;
Anon permit the basest clouds to ride
With ugly rack on his celestial face,
And from the forlorn world his visage hide,
Stealing unseen to west with this disgrace:
Even so my sun one early morn did shine
With all triumphant splendor on my brow;
But out, alack! he was but one hour mine,
The region cloud hath mask’d him from me now.
Yet him for this my love no whit disdaineth;
Suns of the world may stain when heaven’s sun staineth.

Shakespeare's_children

Also, after Shakespeare’s son, Hamnet, died, his work took on a more darker tone. For example, we have Hamlet, The Winter’s Tale, and King John. King John contains unexpected moments of deep emotion, and scholars believe that was Shakespeare working through his emotions. Plus, it’s obvious to note Hamnet and Hamlet are awfully similar.

Shakespeare demonstrates extensive knowledge about other countries and appears to be well-educated with an extensive vocabulary.

Just because I write a play about a mathematician doesn’t mean that I’m a math wiz. Just because I’ve written a play about Japanese internment, doesn’t mean that I was actually there. Not only that, Shakespeare had sources to draw from to explain his extensive “knowledge.” But anyone who really looks at the text will see that it was written by someone who clearly hadn’t traveled outside of his home. I can write about China all I want, but you will be able to certainly tell that I’ve never been there. Also, when it comes to his vocabulary, let’s not forget that the Oxford English Dictionary uses Shakespeare as the origin of words that may have been around for decades prior.

The original plan of Shakespeare’s burial site had him holding a sack of grain, not a quill and parchment paper.

_41619432_shakespearebust203long

Outside of London city lines, a job in the theatre was viewed as inferior and easilydismissed. The change in the burial site plans was only allowed by special license from the Master of the Revels. Of course he had another job to make ends meet. That is still relevant to many involved in the theatre today; you need a second job to pay the bills.

The last will of Shakespeare does not mention his works, how can someone not care about their life’s work? That must prove that Shakespeare didn’t write his plays.

That theory assumes that Jacobeans valued playbooks and intellectual property as highly as we do in our modern age, when they actually didn’t. In fact, in order to print a play and make money off of it, you didn’t need to own it. Look at the quartos of Shakespeare’s work and copies of the folio. All you had to do was register it with the stationer. Ben Jonson seemed to be the only playwright back then who cared about the printing and ownership of his plays.

In closing, there are a lot of theories out there regarding Shakespeare’s authorship. While there are theories with credibility, it is important to investigate and debunk the theories that don’t have tangible support behind it. The idea that it was all one big conspiracy, like “Anonymous” conveys, is highly unlikely. Not only would that be extremely difficult to keep hidden, but also, the fact that there is very little proof showing that this conspiracy actually happened is noteworthy. Finally, it is important to note that while there are theories out there that potentially show that Shakespeare may have been a fraud, these theories are arguable and vulnerable to contradicting views, even more so than the argument that Shakespeare actually wrote his works.

2012: The Year of Extreme

December 31, 2012 Alex Matsuo

2012 was a year of extremes for me.

I either had huge successes or huge fails.

I had major triumphs, but then extreme disappointments.

I met wonderful people, then discovered the ugliness of humanity.

I have learned that people will like you just as long as you give them exactly what they want, and once you don’t, you become the token scapegoat.

I have met numerous people, and yet felt more alone this year than ever.

I have never been emotionally happier, but I’ve never been so heartbroken.

I suppose I’m not writing this with the best mindset, but there were good and bad things about 2012. It’s important to have this to balance life, of course. But it doesn’t make it any less trying.

But if there is anything I have learned about myself in 2012, I’ve learned that I can quickly grow a thick skin, I can put up walls where needed, and I can overcome the toughest of trials.

2013 will be a year of transition for me. There will be lots of changes in my life, my job, my friends, and my family. Some of it will be heartbreaking, but some of it will be wonderful. I look forward to seeing what 2013 will bring, and I’m ready for anything.

For those of you reading, I wish you all a wonderful new year and I hope 2013 brings you everything you hope it will.

Something Has to Change

December 15, 2012 Alex Matsuo

“In the event you hear gunshots, get down low and cover your head. Tell your students if they hear loud noises, they need to cover their heads and run. I’ll escort you to the other side of the campus. I don’t want to alarm the parents, but…in the event I get shot and you hear gunfire, you may be in a hostage situation. Don’t be a hero and you need to comply with the gunman. Make the children walk in the front and be in the back so that if there is a hostage situation, the children will be as far from the situation as possible. Now when we walk onto the pathway, you will see men holding their guns at gunpoint. The gunman is in sight. Tell the kids to only look forward.”

Something you never want to hear from a cop.

This was what the police officer told me on June 23rd, 2011 when the school I was teaching at was in lockdown due to a gunman on the premises. As luck would have it, the stand-off was happening around the corner from my classroom. This lockdown never made it on the news. In fact, this one experience was one of many lockdowns I’ve had to be part of because of someone was on the premises with a gun with the intention to harm. And that is just from me, as one person. How many gun-related lockdowns happen everyday that don’t make it onto the news? The tragic case of Newtown, CT is not only heartbreaking, but also devastating and jarring for me as an educator in the public and private school system.

The tragedy in Newtown reminded me of my vulnerability. As the last day of classes took place yesterday before winter vacation, we had hundreds of parents on campus. And all I could think of was how vulnerable I am and how easy it could be for someone to come into the room I was in and open fire…with no way to defend myself. Even though I’m only a teaching artist, I interact with about 100 kindergartners, 100 first graders and 100 second graders. I see them one hour at a time, once a week, over a course of four days. I’m on campus on a regular basis. The kids yell, “Hi Miss Alex!” when they see me. I see many toothless smiles several times a week and I received enough hugs each day that should make me immune to nearly every sickness out there. I can’t help but get connected to my students. I’ve seen them grow and flourish over the last few months. And this is my third go around in this job, counting the two semesters from last year. Then in the summer, I work as a reading teacher. While teaching wasn’t my chosen career, it has befallen me, and while it’s extremely difficult, it is probably one of the most rewarding professions out there.

Working as a teaching artist and helping teachers incorporate the arts into the curriculums has elevated my respect for teachers to the highest point. Yet, they are underpaid and unappreciated. You trust them to teach your children 6-8 hours a day, five days a week for nine months out of the year.

I’m very angry right now. Yesterday was extremely upsetting and traumatic for everyone across the United States, and that is only speaking for those who weren’t even in Newtown, CT. What happened yesterday…was awful. I’ve cried my tears, and still am. I mourn for those sweet little children. I looked at my kindergarteners and I couldn’t help but cry because these kids were the same age as them. What is someone barged into my class and opened fire? I looked at the photo of the class being led out and seeing those children in tears. I think of the principle and the faces of all the principles I work with come to mind. The same with the teachers. I’ve been very fortunate to work with some amazing teachers and they really do this for the love of children. Let’s face it, teaching has become a dangerous job. I’ve been punched, kicked, spat on by unruly kids. I’ve been yelled at by parents. And that’s just for me. I can only imagine what the full-time teachers deal with.

What happened yesterday was a tragedy. An awful tragedy.

The topic of mental illness and gun control is prominent right now. As it should be. But there are certain arguments that have my blood boiling.

Prepare for a rant.

Resistance to Gun Control: Something has to change. Obviously the system we have right now is not working. Those who are yelling that their rights are being taken away if “guns are taken away from innocent people” are not seeing the bigger picture. There is something not working, and I can’t even fathom that people cannot see that! Obviously there needs to be tighter gun restrictions because psychotic nut jobs are gaining easy access to guns. And why the hell does a civilian need a sniper rifle or an assault rifle for the damn gun collection? I know people who aren’t really right in the head anyway who own guns and I wouldn’t trust them with a gun because they have expressed too much ease in pointing a gun and shooting a friend or ex-girlfriend and they call it protecting themselves. Why is it that it’s harder to get health care than it is to obtain a gun? And how many civilian gun owners have misfired? How many of them try to defend themselves only to accidentally shoot an innocent bystander? Hm. The numbers are startling. I’ve looked into the gun control laws of other countries, and they’re much tighter than the US and they don’t nearly have as many tragedies as we do. They say “guns don’t kill people, people kill people”, etc. Yeah, well, yarn doesn’t become a sweater by itself. And guns don’t kill people unless it is being held by someone. Yes, the man in China stabbed about 20 children on the same day, but those children will survive. They will get to go home soon.

My last thought on gun-control that will segue into my next point. I’ve seen it floating around that teachers need to start carrying guns. One, I shouldn’t have to carry a firearm, but I realize that will probably be in the future in my teaching career. But let me ask you this; when a gunman points a gun at my students, how the hell am I supposed to wrangle 25-30 terrified students ranging from 5-9 years old into a corner while defending myself with a firearm? It’s not realistic. And why is that? Good ole budget cuts.

Higher Security in Schools: This is a good idea, and it’s needed. But, I ask you, especially my right-wing conservative friends who constantly vote against money for schools, where the hell is the money supposed to come from? You don’t want it to come from the taxpayers, and yet, you don’t want it to come from the taxes of the wealthy. And forget pulling our troops from the middle east and saving some money. Hang on while I pull the imaginary money out of my butt. Because of these budget cuts nationwide, teachers are being laid off and the classrooms are bigger than ever, staff is shorthanded to the point where most schools only have one security guard for a school of over 1000. I actually had a friend from my old church look me in the eyes and tell me that teachers should have to go through more pay cuts and if they don’t want to teach, then they don’t have to. Really? How disrespectful and thoughtless can this person be? This is exactly why the public education system is suffering so much. This is why the quality of teachers is declining. How passionate can you be to teach if you’re making little to nothing and have to work second and third jobs to make ends meet? And don’t try to blame this on Obamacare. There has been flaws in the budget system for a long time now. And the government has no problem bailing out car companies, but when is our education system going to get a bail out?

And the solution to this tragedy is to provide guns to teachers? Okay, where’s the money going to come from to pay for this? And where is the money going to come from to pay to train the teachers on how to use it? And then where are they going to store the gun so that their students don’t get access to it? It’s going to have to be stored in a safe and secure location. Trigger lock? A safe? Oh yes, when a gunman barges into my classroom, I’m sure he’ll be willing to wait while I unlock my gun from the safe or from the glass case. This is an honest question to a seemingly unrealistic suggestion.

Godless Society: I don’t think anything infuriates me more than this explanation. Because we have taken prayer and God out of schools, some higher power is taking it out on the children. I don’t think this Godless society is to blame. Last time I checked, the Pledge of Allegiance still has the words, “under God” included. Students can still pray on their own and carry their Bibles as long as they’re discreet. And I work in California, a very liberal state. I see kids freely practicing their religion and it’s not just Christianity. And when people say this tragedy because God was taken out of schools. I call BS. And are you implying that God is taking His anger out on innocent children because there is no longer any school sponsered prayer? What about the boys who were molested by priests in the Church? The place where God is probably most present and something awful like that happened there? Where was God then? If you say that God was absent, then the point of the physical structure of a Church is moot.

While religious organizations are spending millions of dollars for top-rate facilities and anti-marriage equality campaigns, they should take a moment and think. What if you used that money and donated it to the local school district? Obviously hold on to the money needed to run the facility, but do you need a light plot of strobes, various colors or gels, and other expensive lighting to make your worship service look like a rave? No. And you shouldn’t need much production value to perform a sermon. How about everyone cuts back, and send some of that money to the local schools so that they can afford locks on their doors, hire more security, and more efficient safety equipment.

What Newtown has shown us, in the ugliest way possible, is that something has to change. Something has got to give. Obviously what we have going on right is not working. We have to change something, or we are going to destroy ourselves. As Ariel Durant said, “A great civilization is not conquered from without until it has destroyed itself from within.”

Something has to change. The future of American depends on it.

Why I Buzzed Part of My Head

November 17, 2012 Alex Matsuo

A few weeks ago, I did something very daring. I buzzed about a quarter of my head. I did this a few weeks ago and I’m finally getting around to posting about it. The day I got it done, I was being a bit of a tease by saying, “Shaving my head!”

Of course, after saying that, people were freaking out. I got interesting responses and there were a few that surprised me. Those who I thought would disapprove were cheering me on, while others who I thought wouldn’t care or would be somewhat supportive, were aghast. I sort of felt like a troll in the end when I only shaved a part of my head, but it’s still a major change.

I’ve always been known for my full head of hair and my hair color. Because of the hair color thing, I’ve never dyed my hair, and the closest chemical that my hair has been exposed to is a shine treatment that I got for myself for graduation.

So on that note, my abilities to do anything really crazy with my hair have always been limited. My mother wouldn’t even let me do the colored hairspray when I was a kid in fear that I would damage my hair color. Same thing went for temporary hair dye. Never been able to do it. Do I feel like I’m missing out on something by never dying my hair? Eh…sometimes. I get jealous of those who can dye their hair black with bold colors like pink or blue as highlights. I guess that tells you what kind of style I’m into.

But anyway, when I told my mother that I wanted to shave a part of my head, she looked at me and just simply asked, “Why?” And for the first time, I was able to give an answer that made sense and was logical almost immediately. I said, “Because it’s something I want to do for me.”

This was something that I wanted to do for myself. So often I watched other people do this same hairstyle and I always thought about how cool that looked. It was so edgy, and it was a statement of self-independence and not caring about what others think. And on the plus side, it would be easy to hide at work since all I need to do is flip the hair over.

But I’m also aware of what people may think of me with part of my hair gone. They will probably see me as a punk, a hippie, a crazy kid, unprofessional, doesn’t give a f*ck about what society thinks of me (partially true), and maybe a crazy hooligan. But they only see me for a moment. They don’t see me as my friends and family see me. They don’t see the person with the full-time job and a Master’s degree. But you know what? That’s okay.

Living with the haircut for two weeks now has taught me a lot about myself. For one, I feel like I’m myself. I feel like I’ve finally fallen into my own element and for the first time in a long time, I feel like I know myself. I feel so much more confident and happy with my appearance. Not to mention, maintenance is so much easier and my head and neck don’t get quite as hot and greasy like they used to. And straightening my hair only takes a fraction of the time it used to. This is something that I’m so glad I did and I’ll hang on to this haircut for a while. I might even buzz more off now that I know this is something I like. This was a huge step for me, because I really was afraid that it would look terrible, but in the end, I love it.

Take risks. Risk failure. If you fail, you fail. But you’ll never know unless you try.

Rant From a Supposed Non-Voter

October 28, 2012 Alex Matsuo

This ticked me off enough that I decided to video my rant instead of write it.

Haters Gonna Hate

September 16, 2012 Alex Matsuo

This has been a strange week.

My week started with the most incredible high. But with every high, I suppose the universe needed to balance me out.

This week, I’ve dealt with a lot of…haters. This sounds so egotistical of me, and I really don’t want to mean it like it’s sounding. But I’ve been dealing with a lot of haters who’ve held nothing back in calling me out. It’s new to me. Well, at least in large numbers. Actually, it’s just new-ish. I know the reason why I’m dealing with it, it’s because of my associations with a particular group of people. People tell me it’s because “such-n-such” is jealous, blah, blah, blah. I’ve always been pretty good at distancing myself from people I anticipate I may not get along with, or I detect that they may be jerks. But there’s always a few that sneak in.

In my “normal” life, I get along with everyone. Even if I’m not fond of someone, or someone isn’t fond of me, there’s still mutual respect. The community I associate with at home is wonderful. It’s professional, supportive, and we all have a degree of respect for each other. Then I go home and join my “other life” and it seems to be the polar opposite. While I love the work I get to do with this group, sometimes dealing with people who don’t like me can wear on my mind. I don’t care if people like me or not, it’s figuring out how to respond when they make it extremely clear and make sure that you know they don’t like you. And I feel that because of my associations, and the fact I’m not able to verbally bitchslap people the way I used to, these people are taking advantage of that and basically think they can take a dump on my desk and get away with it.

There are two groups. The first group contains people that I’m not emotionally connected to, and they don’t hold back in making complete asses of themselves and target you for making lighthearted commentary on something as simple as a Facebook status. Those don’t get to me as much as they amuse me for the most part.

I was told to not ever write about it because it would show the “haters” that they got to me. But to be perfectly honest…the second group gets to me sometimes. Especially when it’s someone who you had tremendous respect for, and you get accused of something that you didn’t do, and they don’t give you any help or time of day to explain to you what exactly you did wrong. It’s hard. And as much as I wanted to investigate, I have to accept that fact that if the other person really gave a shit about me, they would’ve told me what was going on. Instead of one day, we’re friends, and the next day, I’m gone from a friends list. Majority of people in my life know that the one thing I cannot stand is being accused of something that I didn’t do. I own up to my mistakes, but when I don’t know what I’m supposed to own up to, and therefore rejected for doing something that I’ve never been made privy to, it hurts. A lot. I can only cry and mourn over the loss of the friendship for so long before I can wash my hands of the issue and simply move on with my life. While I know things that were told to me that supposedly came from my former friend in question, I decided to hold it in. I tend to try to let rumors and gossip die with me. I hate bringing up unnecessary drama, especially if it only upsets the person.

I mean…look at it this way:

“Hey Alan, I heard from Brad that he heard from Chris that you were telling him about this one thing that I said…” See where things can get lost? Would it be worth to upset Alan like that when the rumors are coming from second, third and fourth parties?

So dealing with haters. Dealing with rumors. Dealing with gossip. I have to learn how to let it go. I also need to come to terms with letting go the friendships that have ended. I have turned into a person that doesn’t trust anyone, except maybe a few close friends. It stinks, and I’ve become quite cynical of people and their intentions of wanting to befriend me. People are going to talk shit because you’re present. They know who you are and for whatever reason they don’t like you, they’ll talk shit. It’s the way of the game. I was basically broken last week from the loss of a friendship that I treasured. But what doesn’t break you, makes you stronger.

And while haters are going to hate, I’m going to enjoy life. I’m going to wake up in the morning and take a big whiff of the successes I’ve achieved because I’ve worked my ass off to get them. I’m no longer going to be ashamed or self-conscious of my accomplishments and apologize for being who I am because it offends someone. Why does anyone have to be knocked down so that someone else can feel better? Why even give that negative person acknowledgement?

So, I’m back. I’m ready to dive back into life and take the bull by the horns. And if you don’t like it, go ahead and try to knock me down a peg. You’re only going to look like an ass. Unfortunately now, I can’t care anymore. I won’t acknowledge it anymore. I’ve been reminded that life’s too short to focus on that or even give it a glance anymore.

To all the haters out there, thank you.

Thank you for making my backbone stronger than it ever has been in my life.

*Photo Credit: “Swimming in Broken Mirrors”, self-portrait by Caryn Drextal

My Legacy

September 5, 2012 Alex Matsuo

I’ve been thinking a lot about what makes me…well, me.

I’ve been thinking about how people’s perceptions of me differ from person to person. I’ve always been one to confront directly as much as I can. More often than not, whenever I do that, the other person doesn’t communicate and then the birdies chirp in my ear about all the horrible things that the other person has said about me. What’s been hard for me is to forgive those who have hurt me in the past, especially if they didn’t ask for it. But forgiveness is something that benefits both. Living with hate in your heart only hurts yourself. But as the ever-so-wise Dalai Lama said, it’s important to forgive but never forget. If you forget the past hurts, then you risk repeating yourself. So, in turn, I’ll forgive, but never forget, ya know?

I learned early on that if you have a problem with someone, it’s best to directly communicate with that person. My friends and family and even those on the outside know that if they ever have an issue with me, my door is always open. I learned from the best. My mentor is the same way. I’ve tried to live my life as he does and I try to look at life through his eyes.

I also have to accept that other people have very limited perceptions of me. I’ve been accused of having the desire to rub elbows with certain famous people in a particular field I am in. A part of me laughs and the other part makes me shake my head. Being the entertainment business for so long, I’ve had the privilege of working with people who have high acclaim in the industry, and I’ve also been honored to see my own peers rise up to stardom and fame on their own. “Rubbing elbows” with well-known people is part of my job. It’s part of the job of my friends and peers. It’s a part of my life. There’s nothing to brag about because I’m not special or exclusive like that.

But if I did have the option to become famous…there’s only one department I want to acclaim fame in, and that would be the theatre. Either an award-winning producer, playwright, director, or actress. It’s a tall dream. It’s a dream that has a long road ahead of me. But hey, if I become a well-known Shakespearean actress, awesome. But I don’t desire fame, never cared for it. I’ve seen what it does to my friends who have become…known. I’ve seen the transition from local, unknown friend to now everyone knows their name. Some take it in stride, some don’t.

Maybe this is a poor way to express myself. But you know what, I’m human. I can be affected by negativity as much as the next person. I’ve dealt with gossip about me before and I’ll do it again. Like I said, I appreciate it if someone just tells me directly that I’m a conviving bitch rather than tell everyone else about it and leaving me in the dark. If anything, that speaks more volumes about that person’s character than any kind of bad talking they can spew.

The best way to respond to hate is with love. It’s not going to be easy, and it will be a learning process. But I’ve learned that the only way to combat negativity and hate is with love. No need to add fuel to the fire. But also be aware that sometimes I may not feel like fighting back at all, and moving on and forgetting is a much better option. I suppose it all depends on how much I want that person to remain in my life, or whether I’ll be running into them again in the future.

But anyway, this post is about my legacy right? I work with kids and teach them theatre to pay the big bills while acting, writing, dramaturgy, etc. help supplement the rest of my income. I’m truly blessed to be able to do what I love 24/7. But working with kids isn’t for everyone. They drain my life energy. But there’s a reason why I always get a little weepy every time I’ve had to say goodbye at the end of each term. I get attached to those little buggers. Every time a parent approaches me and tells me how much their child has changed positively since they met me, I’m so proud of the child. I was just a coach, a cheerleader, a helper. Even with the kids or teens who meet me with tension and animosity, given some time, the walls break down eventually. I don’t mind if the only memory these kids have of me is “Miss Alex was a crazy chick who taught me drama and who made me laugh.” I’ve seen the growth in kids and teens from their exposure to the arts that has moved me to tears.

I don’t want fame to be my legacy. I want to be able to leave a mark on people as a positive person who has helped people. The reason I love working with kids and teens so much is because I’ve been given a wonderful privilege of changing their lives and making a positive impact on them. For some kids, I may be the only person who accepts their hugs or their drawings. I might be the only person to praise them for a job well done. This translates to teenage life and adult life. You may be the only person who has given someone a lending ear for their problems. You may be the only person who has ever shown a person love instead of disgust. If you want to leave a positive legacy, it starts with you.

You have the ability to change the world and leave a powerful legacy for yourself.

Now, I ask you this: What kind of legacy do you want to leave? How do you want people to remember you?

Leave a comment and share if you’d lie. 🙂

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2KEe-dA3a4M]

Where Do Ideas Come From?

August 12, 2012 Alex Matsuo

Here we are almost half way done with August. How is it that summer is almost over? I haven’t posted in quite some time mainly due to the fact that I’ve gotten extremely busy in the last few months unexpectedly. Busy is good. Very good.

I’ve been pondering the idea of…well, ideas. I’ve been thinking about the origin of ideas lately and wondering where the most brilliant ones come from. I tend to find inspiration from brainstorming with my friends and colleagues. I also find inspiration in nature and people watching. People watching truly is fascinating if you want to learn about mankind. There are so many different people, and each individual human being has their own expanded story waiting to be told. There are so many dynamics and different levels of energy out there in the world.

I was also talking to a few other people and we discussed how drugs may have had a lot to do with some of the more brilliant ideas. Can we only achieve genius with outside influences? Do they unlock a part of our brain that is untapped when we’re sober?

This is a short blog, but I would love to hear your thoughts and opinions as to where ideas come from.