Dickinson College Humanities Program in Norwich

Roman Baths

Shakespeare once said: “I’ll say she looks as clear as morning roses newly washed with dew,” and when speaking of the city of Bath, of the experience of standing for three hours at the Globe theatre and of the sight of St.Paul’s Cathedral, I must repeat it. All the places above, in their own ways, masterpieces feeding the soul with a sense of warming delight. Almost like the whipped cream on my caramel frappuccino, never necessary but always crucial for the perfect execution of an unbelievable taste! The city of Bath, acting as the foundation of this reflection represents the coffee itself, the greater mass, as it was a playground for exploration. Troilus and Cressida at the Globe, definitely the unnecessary yet crucial whipped cream… and the cathedral, of course, the delicious caramel, without it the exquisite taste of my Starbucks caramel frap would never be the same. I think I have fallen in love.

White, red, pink, blue, green, yellow, only some of the colors of the flowers that adorned the historical and alluring city of Bath; the perfect place for a New York City girl like me who wishes to scape from the modernity and daily rush of a fast life. Upon arrival, the first sightings of a landscape unknown, beautifully impenetrable by human innovation as it was preserved, almost like frozen in time. To visit such a place right after visiting Stonehenge (a place I have always known of as one of the world’s greatest mysteries) is to think you have had good coffee to later learn that there is better coffee out there. Stonehenge was an amazing structure to observe, the feeling of standing in front of something so simple yet intricate, so brilliant, filled the space with a different spirit. This spirit of some sort followed our bus on our trajectory, reappearing within the walls of the remarkably well-preserved Roman Bath houses, following us through the brick lanes of the city of Bath. Yesterday I lived a feeling like no other, strange and surreal… definitely “morning roses washed with dew.”

Today, accompanied by coffee of my favorite kind, once again, a feeling like no other made its way through my pores, into the deepest parts of my soul. I do not exaggerate when I say that watching Troilus and Cressida was one of the greatest experiences of my life! Broadway does not compare to the feeling of standing in an open roof theatre for three hours, as it rained, watching a masterpiece of literature coming to live right in front of your eyes. Precious. I now see Shakespeare under a whole new light, a light almost as bright as the one’s lighting up the path that led us to stand in front of St.Paul’s as we crossed the Millennium Bridge after the play.

This morning, before heading out on our walk of Southwark we met up in front of St.Paul’s and standing there was eventful, but standing in front of the lit-up cathedral at around 10:40 p.m. was breathtaking. I’m not sure Christopher Wren, when envisioning this space during the 1600’s, would have imagined it to be the immaculate site that it now is. The sighting of the cathedral completed the night, and the words of Prof. Qualls who expressed his gratitude for taking part in these experiences along with his students came at a perfect time.

After evenings of overanalyzing the lack of “my type of art,” as well as “my type of history,” it was refreshing to be reminded of the good caramel frappuccinos I am capable of enjoying during my time in England. And with a Starbucks in every corner I will continue to enjoy the sometimes bitter coffee foundations, the delicious whipped cream and the sweet caramel, meanwhile reminding myself to sip slowly, to fancy every drink and to cherish every burst of flavor. I have fallen in love again with a caramel frappuccino not so different from the one I am used to, and as long as “she looks as clear as morning roses newly washed with dew” I will continue to fall in love again and again.

Some of us have never asked to experience these things, some of us still yearn to. Either way, believe Shakespeare when he notes that “Love sought is good, but given unsought, is better.” I am thankful for having given the chance to love.

Walking across the Millenium Bridge tonight (well, it was more like jogging to get out stiffness after three hours as a groundling), I was hit by one of those occasional yet profound moments of realization that I was in London. These moments are few and far between, but when you get a moment to step back and look across the Thames and the glowing lights of the city with St. Paul’s dome looming above you, for example, these realizations can hit you like a ton of bricks.

Similar and not unrelated to the “we’re not in Kansas anymore” feelings are the somewhat more frequent instances of understanding the true amount of history behind London and England themselves. In the past few days, I have seen Stonehenge, Roman baths, Medieval cathedrals, prisons, and fortresses, a Shakespeare play, the Jane Austen Centre, the Cabinet War Rooms, and the Tate Modern. The sheer number of years represented by those few landmarks and events is mind-boggling and can serve to disorient the visitor (especially when the visitor comes from a country that’s only approximately 200 years old). I find it interesting to note that I have an almost reverse levels of admiration for the feats and landmarks viewed: I found it utterly astonishing that ancient peoples were able to move stones weighing many tons across empty fields and then arrange them in circular patterns, but I was unimpressed and even disgusted by the artwork of Paul McCarthy digitally projected on a wall with cutting-edge technology at the Tate Modern. I found the stark, bleak nature of the Cabinet War Rooms and the hard work done there to show the strength and resilience of a country under siege, but I found the crown jewels and the grandeur of the monarchy, both past and present, at the Tower of London to be grandiose and over-the-top for a country that is notorious for a “stiff upper lip” and a “keep calm and carry on” sort of mentality.

I suppose what I’m trying to get across is that the sheer nature of hundreds and thousands of years of history (encompassing invasion, multiple great civilizations, and admirable resilience) on a single, small island weighs heavy on a mind that comes from a vast, expansive country with little history at all that can’t even get a healthcare system sorted out. As we now know, you cannot dig down in London without finding something Roman, Medieval, or even prehistoric, yet they still build on and up, layering the present upon the past, and preserving and commemorating as best they can. In my mind, England is a country that seems to be mostly defined by its past, whereas even though America has a shorter history, it seems mostly defined by its present, including its current political standings, fads and trends, and financial influence. London’s ever-changing face and composition always seems to have the same resilient heart, rooted in thousands of years of invasions, shifts in power, influxes of people, devastating disasters, and new technologies, and it appears able to carry on through anything.

After the Tate Modern today, I was unsure if anything could improve my day. To be blunt about it, some of the exhibits were just too much for me. I am not a modern art person to begin with and typically only deal with short visits to modern art galleries. Alas, one exhibit at the Tate Modern completely proved to be far too long for me, even though I viewed it for less than a minute. To describe this exhibit, let us say that how Professor Qualls described the “fisting” exhibit was far tamer than it truly is to view. After that, my day seemed tainted by the experience. I mean the War Cabinet Rooms turned out to be a very nice exhibit and one that I enjoyed walking through, but still that exhibit from the Tate stuck with me. Truly, it haunted my thoughts to an extent. It crossed a line between art and the need to attract attention. To me, art centers more on conveying a message or point to those who wish to find it or come across it. It is not a venue in which to shock and horrify people. But those are just my thoughts on that boundary between art and the desire to attract attention.

After that I thought I would be unable to appreciate anything else the city had to offer. Thankfully I was absolutely wrong. Troilus and Cressida was the perfect remedy for what I saw at the Tate Modern. It was my first official Shakespeare play. I had seen scenes from Shakespeare at the RenFaire before, but never an entire play put on by a professional troupe. It went above and beyond anything I could have hoped for and that erased the negative effects that modern art had left on my day. Even with the rain it was a beautiful night to stand and watch Shakespeare. It could not have been a more appreciate or liked show on my part. I only hope that any Shakespeare plays I see after this one live up to the standards it has set.

Within the past three days I have visited The Tower of London, Stonehenge, the Roman Baths, and the Globe. Visiting these tourist traps has made me realize that in one respect I actually agree with A. N. Wilson, the author of London: A History, I think that the Disney-fication of these places has drastically transformed and even destroyed their historical significance.

When visiting Bath in particular I had trouble grasping that I was actually looking at the real Roman Baths. Not only is this hard for me to fathom this because I have never laid my eyes on something so old, but I also felt that the way they were presented made the idea of their authenticity completely unimaginable. I fold that the amalgam of the old with the new, the numerous signs, and tourists confused me and made it difficult to decipher the authentic from the fake.

I enjoyed every place that I have visited but I feel that attaching a gift shop to a place like Bath and the Tower of London makes them lose all possible historical value, and makes the places feel like an amusement park. After Stonehenge and the Tower of London I was left feeling a sense of unfulfillable and wanting more, almost as though I had missed something.

In fact, I have had a hard time grasping the fact that I am in England at all. The only time that I really started to comprehend that I am actually in England was when we driving through the countryside on our way to Bath. Unlike Stonehenge, the Tower, and the Globe I found this strangely refreshing and honest. There were no tourists snapping a million pictures, fences, snobby people in suits, or signs telling you which buttons to press on your listening device. For me that was England, not the double decker buses nor the red telephone booths with porn pasted on the inside. I am loving London but am anxious to settle in at UEA.

The Jewel House at the Tower of London

Normally I would leave it to the students to give first impressions of a group event, but I take the lead this time. On a chilly, windy night that threatened (and delivered) intermittent showers, few were likely looking forward to standing as groundlings for three hours to watch one of the great bard’s lesser known plays. How the cast of Troilus and Cressida changed our disposition. Although Wannamaker’s Disneyfied recreation of the Globe envelopes you and slowly makes you forget the forgery, the flight of helicopters above breaks the dream. But no harm when you see a performance like we did tonight. Such a wonderful adaptation of Shakespeare I have rarely seen. Witty and natural dialogue brought even greater life from the words on the page. The remarkably beautiful young men in the cast immediately caused a stir, but their acting was more beautiful still. The range of emotions of the young Cressida (Laura Pyper) was remarkable. The British stage has a bright future with this talented young stable of actors, especially Christopher Colquhoun as Hector, Paul Stocker as Troilus, Beru Tessema as Patroclus, and the stunning Ms. Pyper. Matthew Dunster must be commended for superb direction. Let us not forget the haunting vocals of Olivia  Chaney.

But the joy was not limited to a fantastic performance and an after-show stroll across Millennium Bridge to St. Paul’s Cathedral. I think I took most pleasure in watching the responses of the students, some who have never seen Shakespeare performed (and certainly not so close to the stage), who were drawn in to the action. Several commented that they quickly forgot that they were standing for three hours, that the rain had fallen upon us, and that their legs–already weary from a morning’s forced march across Southwark–ached from the week’s activity. This is why I teach…to see young minds gaining new insights and appreciation, growing each day with each new experience.

Twas a magical, dream-like night. This I for one will not soon forget.

Sorry to finally be blogging about Wednesday’s events today, the new blog link wasn’t working last night. The number of interesting trips and tours have begun to snowball this week, and blogging about them in a timely way has gotten a bit more difficult.

That said, I feel as though I must write about my experiences on Wednesday, which for me included both Westminster Abbey and the Churchill Museum/Cabinet War Rooms. I’ll echo what I think everyone’s opinion of Westminster Abbey was: unfathomable, in both size and historical importance. I had not realized just how much of the church is dedicated to graves and memorials. It felt overwhelming to be walking from Newton to Darwin to Elizabeth I while flying past David Lloyd George, Edward Elgar, and other very important people for whom the tour just had no time. Certainly no public building other than Westminster Abbey gives an impression of the richness and grandeur and power present in the totality of English history.

And yet, personally, I think I probably got as much out of the Cabinet War Rooms as I did the Abbey. One of the most amazing things about World War Two, I’ve always thought, was that something as powerful as 20th Century Great Britain was brought so close to annihilation, and survived not through brute force but rather determination, cooperation, and strong and unwavering leadership.

Seeing the Abbey and the War Rooms in the same day meant seeing Britain’s at its most epic and powerful and at its simplest, starkest, and truly finest. (Here I’m using juxtaposition, a strategy never before employed on this blog). The Rooms themselves, for those who’ve not yet seen them, are presented with simply an audio guide and some signage, (rather than overblown multimedia) which I think serves them well. Even recreated, they do not appear visually impressive as they were reserved for the PM, the Cabinet and important staff, and there was a minimum of space under the concrete/steel buffer. If one didn’t know the decisions made and the speeches given from that place, one might find it unremarkable.

I might not have recommended the Churchill Museum adjoining the War Rooms if it were on its own. It does gloss over the poorer choices of his career and has quite a confusing setup and superfluous multimedia. My favorite part, frankly, was the loop of video from his remarkable memorial service.

On the tube home I was thinking how tremendous it is that the nerve center of Britain could be confined to those dozen or so rooms in 1940, and only 13 years later it could be back in all its splendor at Westminster Abbey for the coronation of a new queen (with nary a toilet flush to be heard).

After experiencing the National Gallery and the British Museum, the Tate Modern was shocking in and of itself. Compared to the beautiful architecture and classical feel of the other two galleries, the vast emptiness and cold steel of the Tate created an almost uncomfortable feeling. Meant to emphasize the artwork displayed, the white walls and dead space made us feel small.

The entrance hall of the Tate Modern

The Tate was also much louder and more family-friendly than the other two museums. Children were sprawled out on the floor and benches, creating their own modern art. Graphic installations were clearly marked by both signs and museum employees. We were impressed by the museum’s effort to be open to all audiences.

Through a combination of choice and naivety, the three of us entered Paul McCarthy’s Projection Room. At first, we were simply disgusted and disturbed by the sexually explicit/grotesque imagery. The videos were so shocking that we can barely even remember what we saw. (For those brave at heart, just google image search “Paul McCarthy” for video examples similar in nature to the exhibit.) A brief peek at the Viennese Actionists exhibit didn’t help to settle our stomachs and minds, so we decided to leave.

Upon returning to the Arran House, we felt obliged to further research McCarthy in attempt to understand the meaning behind his “art.” We discovered he is mocking social rules and standards in addition to the media’s control (read: brainwashing) of our actions. Food and bodily fluid are his medium and his body is used as a paintbrush and a canvas. We found McCarthy views himself as separate from the Viennese Actionists. He states, “Vienna is not Los Angeles. My work came out of kids’ television in Los Angeles. I didn’ t go through Catholicism and World War II as a teenager, I didn’ t live in a European environment. People make references to Viennese art without really questioning the fact that there is a big difference between ketchup and blood. I never thought of my work as shamanistic. My work is more about being a clown than a shaman.”

We’ll leave you with this and let you interpret for yourselves McCarthy’s art and vision.

   As we all stop by the World War II memorial  to capture the moment of our presence at this landmark, I notice a memorial representing  women who served in World War II and can not help but to think “Finally! A monument to show dedication of and to women.”  This thought crosses my mind because although England had many women in power and on throne, I have not seen many acknowledgments in our weeks of travel. This has led me to take numerous photos of the monument as well as complete more research. 

   Being in a country where white male domination occurred for centuries and being a Women’s and Gender Studies major I could not be more proud to have a bronze sculpture situated in Whitehall, London located in Parliament Square.  It was unveiled on July 9th, 2005 by Queen Elizabeth II and was named National Monument to the Women of World War II.  It was sculpted by John W. Mills and it stands at 22 feet high, 16 feet long, and 6 feet wide. The sculpture itself includes many details that one would not notice unless they move closer to the monument to observe it. There is lettering on the sides which replicates the typeface used on war time ration books. Also there are seventeen individual sets of clothing and uniforms depicting the ones worn at war and the jobs which women held throughout the years. Baroness Boothroyd, Former Speaker of the House of Commons and a person responsible for raising the funds for the monument stated: 

“I hope that future generations who pass this way down Whitehall will ask themselves what sort of women were they and look at history for the answer.”

   With a lot of positive responses regarding the dedication, there also came many negative comments. Many were outraged because the monument is dedicated specifically to women while there is no monument in existence dedicated to the men who served in the World Wars. Another interesting debate that occurred was regarding the patriarchal constructs and how sacrifices and male contributions to the war are automatically acknowledged over the women’s contributions. Therefore, a memorial dedicated specifically to women were constructed in order to remind those who pass down Whitehall.

   While reviewing the comments expressed by the British public, I am debating on how I feel about the monument. But I do have to say that no matter what the reasons were for the British government constructing this piece of art, I am happy. I do believe that there needs to be a reminder, especially in an area such as the Parliament Square, that women played a large part in not only supporting men but also taking over jobs that were required for survival men, women and children.  I would love to know what everyone thinks about the Monument. Whether it should be in existence, whether anyone else felt how big of a part it played in the Square, and whether it is fair to the men who served during the War.