Shakespearean Comedy: Trust us, it's funny

Passage Analysis
Pyramus
O wherefore, Nature, didst thou lions frame?Since lion vile hath here deflower'd my dear:
Which is--no, no--which was the fairest dame
That lived, that loved, that liked, that look'dwith cheer.
Come, tears, confound;Out, sword, and wound
The pap of Pyramus;
Ay, that left pap,
Where heart doth hop:
(Stabs himself)
Thus die I, thus, thus, thus.
Now am I dead,Now am I fled;
My soul is in the sky:Tongue, lose thy light;Moon take thy flight:
Now die, die, die, die, die.

In this passage a company of "actors" performs at the kingdom of Theseus the tragedy of Pyramus and Thisbe. This passage exemplifies the "comedy" Mr. Klimas assured us existed in Midsummer Night's Dream. Peter Quince, a ridiculously conceited over-actor, essentially takes a paragraph to die. The line "Now I am dead," accompanied by the repetition of "Thus" and "die" is the primary cause for humor in this passage. Attempting to capture the intensity of the moment(and convey what he perceives as his immense talent), Quince transforms what should be a tragic and dramatic moment into a ridiculous ending.

Commentary on the genre:
Four people are miserable. Hermia and Lysander are forbidden to be together because Hermia is promised to Demetrius, who is turn loves Hermia. Helena, who is hopelessly obsessed with Demetrius, finds herself distraught over his adamant refusal to return her love. Sounds hilarious right? Well, leave it to Shakespeare to turn a situation which has the potential for tragedy, into a lofty, light-hearted comedy. Shakespeare is able to take a situation which doesn't necessarily scream hilarity(the play begins with Hermia's life being threatened if she does not yield to custom) into one of his greatest comedies. He accomplishes this through his incorporation of fairies and Bottom's troop of actors, who introduce nonsense and trickery to lighten the atmosphere and solve the lovers' problems in a simple(although completely unrealistic) manner. Shakespeare includes the performance of Pyramus and Thisbe and has the troop of actors make a mockery of it in order to lighten the serious nature of the lovers' problems. It seems as though this play serves as Shakespeare's attempt to turn the drama and day-to-day trials of life into trivial, humorous predicaments that can be just as easily solved as if fairies carried them away.

Personal Response:

I have seen this play performed countless times and loved it. However, when I read the play I was somewhat disappointed. When I saw it performed, I was able to experience the comedy and dream-like atmosphere intended by Shakespeare. I did not experience the same atmosphere, however, when reading it. I instead became aware of how ridiculous the premise of the play is. The main idea embodied by the play is that arranged marriages are wrong and love should be the guiding force in life. The ending is seemingly the perfect happy ending, with Hermia and Lysander, Demetrius and Helena riding off into the sunset. However, Demetrius is bewitched into loving Helena, creating the very situation of forced affection that the play spoke against. How can this be a true happy ending for Demetrius? What about Helena? Sure she has Demetrius' love, but it isn't authentic. This sort of sours the warm and fuzzy feeling expected. Perhaps Shakespeare intended to negate his entire play with this all too perfect ending, asserting that you must seize control of your problems and that absolute happiness does not exist. Whether or not this was his intention, having seen and then read the play, I am bothered by the ending.

Richard III: My hero

Passage Analysis:


"The lights burn blue. It is now dead midnight.
Cold fearful drops stand on my trembling flesh.
What do I fear? Myself? There’s none else by.
Richard loves Richard; that is, I am I.Is there a murderer here?
No. Yes, I am.
Then fly! What, from myself? Great reason. Why:Lest I revenge.
Myself upon myself?Alack, I love myself. Wherefore? For any good
That I myself have done unto myself?
O no, alas, I rather hate myself
For hateful deeds committed by myself.I am a villain"(V.v. 134-135)

Richard III, Duke of Gloucester, is perhaps the greatest villain in literary history. There are few characters which evoke greater hatred than this deformed and hideous historical figure. The above passage follows Richard's dream in which all those who he has killed visit him. Essentially this passage represents Richard's first encounter with his own humanity. He begins to experience something which he believed himself immune to: guilt and fear. He begins to question his emotions, beyond the hatred he feels for, well, everyone. The repetitive use of "I" and "myself," demonstrates Richard's self-reflection. Throughout the play Richard is driven by his personal desires and the desire to cause other's misery, yet he does not realize the condition of his self-loathing. He does not recognize that he truly hates himself. The Duke is amazed by the "...fearful drops standing on [his] trembling flesh..." for he did not know that he felt any sort of responsibility for the murder of those he had killed. Yet, he is left questioning why such a dream would disturb him to such an extent. Richard realizes that he has no reason to love himself and therefore his actions must be a product of his extreme hatred for himself, making him realize "I am a villian."

Commentary on Genre:

It is difficult to imagine that an individual like Richard actually existed. Shakespeare depicts this historic figure utilizing both factual and arguable evidence. While the play provides insight into the tumultuous atmosphere of this time in history(following the War of the Roses), I think the play serves more as an interpretation of Richard as an individual. Shakespeare created an image of Richard based upon his interpretation of the history. The evil nature of Richard, while revealed a great deal from his actions recorded in historic documents, truly comes alive in Shakespeare's interpretation. The language, the persuasive, cunning, and hate-filled lines of Richard III, embody the character far more effetcively than a textbook ever could.

Personal Response:

Although I know that admitting this will result once again in being accused of being a sinister person(as suggested by a certain teacher), Richard III, as of yet, is my favorite work of Shakespeare's. I found Richard's character fascinating. He is the most despicable villain ever to be created, yet people yield to his personality. He is physically deformed, but his personailty is even more warped, yet he is able to persuade a woman standing next to her dead husband(whom Richard had killed) that he would make a good replacement. I found Shakespeare's use of ironic, dark humor extremely effective in embodying Richard's personality, which in itself was fascinating.

Macbeth should invest in some handsoap

Passage Analysis:
[Aside] Two truths are told,As happy prologues to the swelling act
Of the imperial theme.--I thank you, gentlemen.
Aside

Cannot be ill, cannot be good: if ill,
Why hath it given me earnest of success,
Commencing in a truth? I am thane of Cawdor:
If good, why do I yield to that suggestion
Whose horrid image doth unfix my hair
And make my seated heart knock at my ribs,
Against the use of nature?
Present fears
Are less than horrible imaginings:
My thought, whose murder yet is but fantastical,
Shakes so my single state of man that function
Is smother'd in surmise, and nothing is
But what is not.(Act 1 Scene II)


William Shakespeare's Macbeth delves into the realm of decision and possibility, illustrating the implications of fate and corruption of humanity. The tragedy of Macbeth lies in the knowledge he gains from the witches at the beginning of the novel. Just as with other literary characters who encounter the prophesy of their fate(remember Oedipus?), Macbeth initiates his own destruction. Upon hearing he "...shalt be king hereafter!" Macbeth immediately contemplates the limitations of his ambitions. Would he have considered yielding to his dark ambitions had the witches not introduced the idea initially? I think the primary characteristic of Macbeth as a tragic figure originates in the immense internal struggle he grapples with. In this passage Macbeth first addresses the rising desire to become king, which perhaps existed prior to encountering the witches, in the above passage. The beginning of his internal struggle is exemplified by Macbeth's repetitive use of rhetorical questions. He questions himself: "Why hath it given me earnest of success/Commencing in a truth? I am thane of Cawdor: If good, why do I yield to that suggestion/Whose horrid image doth unfix my hair/And make my seated heart knock at my ribs/Against the use of nature?" It is here that Macbeth attempts to rationalize with himself. Shakespeare creates a sort of paradox in the first line "Cannot be good, cannot be ill/if ill why hath it given me earnest success...?" in response to the prophesy of the witches. Macbeth realizes what his motivation for power may lead him to do, yet defends that the result of the news is innocent. He is granted the title thane of Cawdor without lifting a finger; the witches were right about that, so how can anything else they prophesied be bad? This passage serves as a foreshadowing of what is to come. The expected excitement of the moment is decreased by Macbeth's suspicion of the unnatural nature of his newly acquired knowledge("Against the use of nature"). He wishes to enjoy the moment but is shaken by the corruptive nature of his ambitions. Macbeth is shocked by the his thoughts, presumably those plotting the death of the king and is horrified at the minute transformation this prophesy has cause in him. "My thought, whose murder yet is but fantastical/Shakes so my single state of man that function Is smother'd in surmise, and nothing is/But what is not." At this point in the play, Macbeth has not lost his sense of morality. Shakespeare depicts the deterioration of Macbeth's conscience, due to Lady Macbeth's cunning control over him, and identifies this loss of morality as tragedy. This passage demonstrates the initial integrity of Macbeth, highlighting the tragedy of his eventual degradation, which, had he not encountered the witches, could have been prevented.


Commentary on Genre:


When the word tragedy is used in proximity to Shakespeare, one automatically thinks of two- absurd-dead-teenagers. However, Shakespeare redefines tragedy in Macbeth. The character orchestrating a great whole of the murders is the tragic figure. Can you say irony? Macbeth is a victim of fate. He discovers his destiny and is driven to seek it. The tragedy of Macbeth truly lies in his discovery of fate, in his inability to deny that which has been prophesied. When reading this play, the reader is forced to question: would any of these events have occurred had Macbeth not encountered the witches? Could he have become king another way? Was there any escaping this appointed fate? Macbeth is truly a victim of circumstance, eventually destroyed by himself. The witches only disclose his completed fate after Macbeth has acted upon their first prophesy. This in itself is innately tragic because it is possible that Macbeth wouldn't have pursued the first prophesy had he known his ultimate fate. I find the difference in Shakespeare's tragedies extremely interesting. Richard III or The Tragedy of Richard III does not inspire sympathy for the main character. While Macbeth does commit despicable acts, just as Richard, the reader is drawn more to Macbeth. Shakespeare accomplishes this difference in reactions primarily by depicting Macbeth's transformation. At the beginning of the novel he is regarded as noble by all who encounter him, yet he is gradually corrupted by the knowledge of his potential and the urgings of his wife. He then progressively is dehumanized. Richard, however, is introduced as a heinous individual, devoid of all morality. Shakespeare manipulates the reader's perception by depicting these individuals in different stages of dehumanization. Richard seems as though he was born evil. Macbeth, perhaps like all humanity, was born with the capacity to be evil and eventually embraces it. If one believes in the Lord of the Flies/Heart of Darkness notion that all of mankind possesses an inner "darkness," it is because Macbeth yields to this inner darkness that perhaps the reader is able to relate and sympathize with him more readily than Richard.

Personal Reflection:

I first read Macbeth in 5th grade and even though I loved it then, my understanding of the dimensions of the circumstances were extremely shallow. While I'm certain there are still aspects of this play that I do not understand, I really enjoyed reading it. Even though I have read endless books dealing with fate in my high school career, I never really can get enough of them. It is a topic which fascinates me, and I change my mind nearly ever time I read another interpretation of it. As with all of Shakespeare's plays, I would much rather see a performance of the play than read it. While the language alone is incredible, I feel like I am missing a lot which would be provided by the dynamics of the actors.