Hello again from a snowy England (or United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland if you insist).
Yes, it’s snowed for the past three days (meaning no school on Friday!) so I’ve stayed at home.
Just a few moments ago, I read an article on Richard III on Daily Telegraph. It got me thinking of an earlier project which I never got round to do:
THE MISJUDGED CLUB!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Basically, anyone who has been misunderstood or has had an image in people’s head which is wrong can join the club, and each member has to present his or her true self and why they have been misjudged. I’ve done a lot of research into each of my recruits , so, here they are:
- Richard III: So, in Shakespeare’s play and Thomas More‘s A History of King Richard III, Richard III is accused of murdering Edward IV’s boys, the Princes in the Tower. However, there is no historical proof of Richard ever doing this. Other accusations about Richard III that might not be true were that he ordered men to kill his brother George (Edward IV did that), and poisoned his wife. However, what he did do was allow people accused of crimes to pay money so they won’t be locked up until their trial and prevented restrictions on books due to his own love of books. He also recorded acts of parliament in English and allowed people to get money from the government to pay for lawyers in their trial if they didn’t have enough money. Nice chap!
- Emperor Nero: OK, still a nasty piece of work, but, like Richard III, has been accused of something major which he might not have done: setting fire to Rome. As a CSI case, they would try to find Nero’s motive: nothing (oh, by the way, he didn’t play the fiddle while Rome burnt. Fiddles weren’t invented until the 15th century). When Nero heard the news about the fire, he raced to Rome from his holiday home to take charge of the firefighting efforts. As people were accusing him of starting the fire, Nero started to blame Christians because Christians were not popular at that time, and emperors before Nero had executed Christians. Oh, he also made an early type of ice cream. New fact every day!
- Frankenstein‘s monster: First things first, Frankenstein is the doctor, Frankenstein’s monster is the monster (duh). Second thing second, in the original book, Frankenstein is a young Swiss student and the monster is a tall yellow creature with no bolt through the neck. Third thing third, the movie posters of the film showed the monster green with lumbering movements and a bolt through the head. However, the monster in the book could actually walk and run. He was very agile and could speak normal English.
- Elizabeth I: Not so much portrayed badly, but portrayed too positively. She burned almost as many Catholics as her sister, Mary I, did to Protestants. She also locked up and beheaded her cousin (Mary, Queen of Scots) for being in a rebellion not involving Mary. Elizabeth I was also ugly. Her fame mostly comes from people like Shakespeare, Marlowe and Walter Raleigh (who didn’t bring back potatoes). Her reign is known as the Golden Age of literature and had many famous people who did famous things (or not).
- The Jungle Book: You might think it’s going OTT to put a whole book in my club, but Disney changed a lot of things from the book (like singing was not in the book). For example, King Louis the orangutan was not in the book as there are NO ORANGUTANS IN INDIA! Second, Colonel Hathi the elephant is evil in the book, having once destroyed a village as revenge for being captured. However, in the film, he was portrayed comically. Thirdly, Kaa the snake is a good guy who helps Mowgli save the day. In contrast, the film makes Kaa an evil snake who hypnotises people.
What do you think of the gang so far? If you think anyone should join, please leave a comment below!