Kristian Mercer

Filling the Well: Shakespeare's "The Comedy of Errors"

At our chapter meeting a few weeks ago Gerri Russell gave a really encouraging talk about the writing process...well, let's be honest. The writing struggle.

She titled her talk "Resurrecting the Muse."

Now, let me just begin by saying that Gerri is an inspiration for us all. It took her thirteen years to sell her first book, The Warrior Trainer. And that's after seven completed manuscripts and two - yes, TWO - Golden Heart awards (which is - for those of you who may not know - the equivalent of the Oscar for unpublished authors). She definitely knows a thing or two about endurance, as well as engaging that pesky muse.

All of Gerri's hints were excellent, but the one that really resonated with me was simple: give your muse something to work with. Fill that creative well. Go to movies, listen to some great music, visit museums.

Hmmmm, thought I. How about a play?

So last weekend Mr. Mercer and I grabbed tickets to the Seattle Shakespeare Company's performance of "The Comedy of Errors." Now I am - I confess - a member of the Society of Professional English Majors, and as such I dutifully took two Shakespeare courses in college.

But I didn't remember a single thing about this play. I had it totally confused with "Twelfth Night" - the play where Viola cross-dresses as her twin brother Sebastian, and much mayhem ensues.

"The Comedy of Errors" is also about twins - two pairs of twins, in fact. Not to mention a wife worried about her husband's fidelity, a pair of young lovers, a swordfight, mistaken identity, and - wait, I've saved the best for last - the reunion of a husband and wife who've been separated for over 20 years.

Shakespeare, in other words.

So what did my muse discover? Well, there's certainly lots of scope for the imagination - couples in trouble, couples enjoying love's first blush, couples brought back together by the whim of fate.

But I also noticed something new. If you listen to (or read) the dialogue of this play, it's fairly obvious that Shakespeare wants everyone to experience the joys of falling in love - but he's not so enthusiastic about marriage.

Now that's interesting. Even more interesting when you consider that romance authors are working the same trope. Our books are about the romantic journey - the progress of a hero and heroine towards recognition and acceptance of their mutual love - and the natural conclusion of that journey tends to be marriage.

But that's where our novels end. Unless there's a sequel - or a whole series of sequels, as with Jo Beverley's "Company of Rogues" or Mary Jo Putney's "Fallen Angels" - we don't know what happens after the vows are exchanged. Fortunately (unlike Shakespeare) we tend to imagine that our favorite heroes and heroines live happily ever after - but we don't write about that.

I wonder why we focus so much on the thrills, the chills, the crushing despair - and the ecstatic triumph - that results from the early days of love. Wistful thinking? Memories of glory past? Endorphins?

Calling all muses - what do you think?