December 18, 2006

Time, six oclock pm place, regular classroom

yuppers. please correct me if i'm wrong

Final

Hi, I was just wondering if anyone could tell me where the final is. I know the time and that it is tonight but I realized I don't remember where it is. Thanks.

December 15, 2006

The Review

Review:

These are the passages that may or may not be covered on the exam. Alex told us that for each play, one or two passages will be represented. You’ll be asked to identify the speaker and the play. The starred (*) passages were noted in the review as important.
“and following? means the whole passage.

Taming of the Shrew
Induction I 127-134 Lord
Induction II 64-73 Christopher Sly
1.1.105-111 Gremio
1.2.27-31 Grumio
2.1.268-272 Petruccio
3.1.40-43 Bianca
4.1.169 Petruccio
3.2.8-20 Catherine*
5.2.150-158 Catherine*
4.3.106-113 Petruccio

Titus Andronicus
1.1.441-452 Tamora*
2.1.18-25 Aaron*
3.1.1-11 Titus
4.1.96-102 Aaron
5.1.124-144 Aaron*

Richard III
3.4.74-79 Richard
1.1.1 and following Richard *
5.7.7 Richard
4.1.77-84 Lady Anne
2.2.79-88 Duchess of York

Merchant of Venice
1.3.139-147 Shylock
2.7.64-68 Morocco
3.1.45 and following Shylock*
4.1.179 and following Portia*
5.1.299-306 Graziano

Hamlet
2.2.239 and following Hamlet*
1.3.75-81 Polonius
1.2.129 and following Hamlet*
2.1.88-92 Ophelia
1.5.167-181 Hamlet
3.1.149 and following Ophelia
4.7.149 and following Gertrude
5.2.302-304 Horatio
3.4.30-31 Hamlet
4.3.20-25 Hamlet

Troilus and Cressida
1.2.260-273 Cressida*
2.1.42-48 Thersites
3.2.170-183 Cressida*
4.7.136-142 Hector
5.2.137 and following Troilus

King Lear
1.1.35 and following King Lear*
1.2.1-22 Edmund*
1.4.267-281 King Lear
2.1.78-79 Gloucester
2.2.14-23 Kent
3.2.1-9 King Lear*
3.7.57-67 Gloucester
4.1.1-9 Edgar
4.6.95-103 King Lear
5.3.304-309 King Lear

Tempest
1.2.400-406 Ariel
2.2.43-52 Stefano
3.2.83-90 Caliban*
4.1.146-163 Prospero*
Epilogue Prospero*

You’ll need to explain 3 passages, one from a comedy, one from a tragedy, and one from either the Tempest or Richard III.

For the essay, we discussed these topics, you can use any play to discuss the topics, but the ones I’ve listed were the ones that we discussed in the review:
-What defines a tragedy-do the plays fit neatly into the genres that they’ve been assigned?
-The role of the other as shown in Merchant of Venice, Tempest, Titus
-Homosexual love as shown in sonnets, merchant of Venice
-Role of Nature as shown in the Tempest, King Lear
-Christianity as shown in King Lear, merchant of Venice
-Role of women as in Taming of the Shrew
-Justice
-Appearance vs. Reality like in taming of the shrew
-Revenge cycle
-Role of violence
-Marriage/love
-Familial relationships, especially father-son, father-daughter
-Love vs. Lust
-Shakespeare speaking to audience-epilogue in tempest, sonnets, Hamlet

December 9, 2006

British Library: Treasures in Full

While doing further research for my Richard III group project paper, I came across this amazing site from the British Library: scans of the originals of many editions from many of Shakespeare's plays. It's amazing!

It's really fun to try and read some of the more famous speeches with the original typesetting. For some reason it inspires me to put on a ridiculously bad English accent. I end up sounding like a cockney Minnesotan pirate. It isn't pretty on the ears folks.

November 27, 2006

One of Shakespeare's best

I really liked the play King Lear. Although I truely believe it was a tradgety I also found certain parts of the play to be really funny, mainly when King Lear breached insanity. I liked that unlike many of Shakespeares plays this one was well organized and many of the characters had motives behind their actions rather than being completely irrational, that is until everyone starting killing and dieing randomly in the end. I thought the beginning of the play sounded almost like a fairy tale when King Lear asked his daughters to prove their love for him. But it was definately an intense, well thought out play. I liked that there were true characters that actually seemed good hearted like Albany, Edgar, and Cornelia. In many of Shakespeare's plays even the main characters aren't good people. I thought the rivalry betweent the sisters was interesting. The two seemed to have everything planned out so well until their jealousy and lust for more turned them against each other. I thought the role of a father was a definate key in this play as far as similarities between Gloucester and King Lear both choosing to support the very children (Edmund, Goneril, and Regan) that planned to ruin them. It shows that although they were good men they had poor judgement and didn't trust their most loving children.

One of Shakespeare's best

I really liked the play King Lear. Although I truely believe it was a tradgety I also found certain parts of the play to be really funny, mainly when King Lear breached insanity. I liked that unlike many of Shakespeares plays this one was well organized and many of the characters had motives behind their actions rather than being completely irrational, that is until everyone starting killing and dieing randomly in the end. I thought the beginning of the play sounded almost like a fairy tale when King Lear asked his daughters to prove their love for him. But it was definately an intense, well thought out play. I liked that there were true characters that actually seemed good hearted like Albany, Edgar, and Cornelia. In many of Shakespeare's plays even the main characters aren't good people. I thought the rivalry betweent the sisters was interesting. The two seemed to have everything planned out so well until their jealousy and lust for more turned them against each other. I thought the role of a father was a definate key in this play as far as similarities between Gloucester and King Lear both choosing to support the very children (Edmund, Goneril, and Regan) that planned to ruin them. It shows that although they were good men they had poor judgement and didn't trust their most loving children.

Definitely Tragic

I thought King Lear was a prideful, but nonetheless respectful, character from the beginning of the play. Yes, he exiled his favorite daughter, but due to her own stubbornness and pride. Regardless, he recognized his degeneration due to age and relinquished his throne and entrusted his personal care to those he most trusted. The tragedy is that he was so poorly treated, his kingdom, and his entire family were destroyed. Of all of the plays we've read, I think this is most suitably called a tragedy.

brutal sisters

I was shocked in the end when I found out what had happened to Goneril and Regan. First of all, I was amazed that Regan was poisoned by her own sister. This clearly shows that Goneril was mean and cruel and cared nothing for her sister; she was in it for her own self. But then why would she commit suicide? She could have had Edmund to herself, which is why I thought she poisoned Regan. Maybe after she poisoned her sister she felt guilty and couldn't live with what she had done. I was not really expecting that either of them were going to live to the end, but I was definatley surprised by how they did die in the end.

Sibling Rivalries

One question I asked myself as I read King Lear was "What kind of statement is Shakespeare making about daughters?" He seems to portray daugthers in a negative light. It made me wonder if Shakespeare was implying that a King must pass on power through male heirs or major problems will arise. His daughters were selfish and always concerned about themselves. The were competing for the same man (Edmund), who was a Machaevellian bastard, who sold out his father - and got his father's eyes cut out. He lied to get his brother Edgar banished. It seems that sons are not all that great either. However Edmund was that bastard son. It is interesting to me that the characters who disguised themselves througout the play were the same characters who were in better situations at the end. Another part of the play that I enjoyed was that the fool died in the end. I could not believe that people would tolerate the poignant remarks that he made at King Lear's side.

Goneril Vs. Regan

In the beginning of the play, the two sisters seemed like they were joining together to take over for their father, King lear. However, as we all know, this was not the case in the end. The two sisters battled against each other not only for the land, but also for Edmund (which I thought was a little strange). This was interesting because it didn't really seem like Edmund was really interested in either of them. He just kind of went along with both of them and played both sides. This way, he kept both sisters happy. I don't think Edmund actually liked either of them at all. But it seemed like the sisters really thought that he was in love with them. This whole thing shows that the girls really don't know what relationships are all about. This is evident not only in this case, but also with their won husbands. Neither one of the girls was truely being faithful to their husband, and therefore don't really care about these men as people. They were both selfish from the beginning with the land, and they continued to be this way with Edmund.

king lear is my dad

I like how King Lear takes something that Cordelia said and turned into a huge deal even though there was nothing wrong with the response in the first place. My dad also does that. I've been told I do it too. Let's be as pessimistic as possible and then overreact so that everyone is miserable in the end.

edmund's love

in the last act V, Edmnund tells the audience that he has sworn his love to both Goneril and Regan. Why do you think this is? Do you think that this triangle is because they all do not want to show mercy to Lear and Cordelia? Or do you think he confesses his love to each sister, in order to obtain Lear's Kingdom for himself?

nothing

does nothing really come of nothing?
cordelia tells lear that she has notihng to tell him, because she doesn't have anything more to offer than the love of a daughter for a father. nothing seems to really come for nothing in the end of the play, with the good and evil characters both dying. Lear, and CoRdelia, both die in the end, proving this fact.
i think it is interesting that once lear finally comes to realize cordelias love for him, it is too late, and he and her both end up dying. it shows that human nature is to doubt, and perhaps be selfish.

nothing

does nothing really come of nothing?
cordelia tells lear that she has notihng to tell him, because she doesn't have anything more to offer than the love of a daughter for a father. nothing seems to really come for nothing in the end of the play, with the good and evil characters both dying. Lear, and CoRdelia, both die in the end, proving this fact.
i think it is interesting that once lear finally comes to realize cordelias love for him, it is too late, and he and her both end up dying. it shows that human nature is to doubt, and perhaps be selfish.

Madness

I thought the play was good.... in the sense that I read it and liked all the killings and deaths. But I was really starting to notice a reacurring theme of madness. Everywhere you look in Shakespeare's plays there is crazy guy or somebody going crazy. It seems so natural and everyone doesnt think twice about it. Lear goes mad and people expect it. He goes in and out of sainity like hes possessed. Not to mention that there are more crazy people just outside wandering around ready to take Gloucester away into the woods and if you are ever in need of being disguised just put on some tattered clothes and say your mad people will belive anything. I just thought it was weird that so many people out their were crazy or about to go crazy.