Shakespeare's Last 4 Romances/Plays

As the semester wraps up and I finish all my last blog assignment I can't help but think of how much I've learned this semester. The things I've learned this semester will benefit me in my future career in teaching. Enough of this sappy stuff to the issue at hand, Shakespeare's last four plays.

Some people argue that plays like Cymbeline are mistakes in the otherwise amazing body of work. I disagree, I think plays like Cymbeline are a perfect example of the evolution of Shakespeare. To me writers that go through changes and evolve are much better than writers who don't. Who wants to read the 33rd book by an author hasn't changed, evolved, or honed their skills. It would be like reading their very 1st novel but with different names and locations, BORING!!! Yes i agree he does do some odd and quirky things like the recognition scene at the end of Pericles. I'm pretty sure if that was set our time period that would be either and episode of Jerry Springer or Maury. He probably could have wrapped that scene up and made it simpler.

As far as the Winter's Tale and The Tempest go i will talk about a Winter's Tale instead because most of us had previous experience with The Tempest either in high school or at some point in our collegiate careers. I'll admit i can understand that some people view it more as a comedy than a romance which is understandable. At the same time i can see it being a tragedy as well because the way Leontes pushes himself into seeing things that aren't really there and the terrible actions he commits as a result of this are sad to watch. Yes in the end everything works out for the best but i think this could have been a play that had it turned out the opposite would have easily been a tragedy. All it would have taken would have been a few more deaths and a mixture of self realization and regret and pow you have a tragedy. All in all I really enjoyed this play and was glad that Professor Sexson put it on the reading list for this semester.

Well as they say all good things must come to an end(even though I'm not sure if this post qualifies) and I've enjoyed myself in this class this semester. My only regret is that i won't be able to take another class from Professor Sexson before I graduate. In the spirit of Shakespeare I'll end with this quote from Juliet. "Parting is such sweet sorrow"

Mything the Point ( My paper)

Well here it is in all its glory or lack of it. Its not as good as some of the others I've read so far but that's alright I've accepted the fact that there are some pretty darn smart people in our class. Without further ado my paper.

Matthew Helm
Literature 300
Professor Sexson
Final Paper

Mything the Point

First off the title of this paper was a genius idea (thank you Professor Sexson) since my paper will probably hit nowhere near the points I try to make within it. King Lear is argued to be Shakespeare's greatest tragedy. I agree, but I think that a major parallel can be drawn between Lear and several other characters in his plays. Othello and Antony are put into equally tragic situations in my opinion. What is it that these three characters share that makes their individual stories so tragic? The common factor that all three men share is their love for the people closest to them. I believe LOVE makes fools and witless neanderthals out the most intelligently passionate individuals in Shakespeare's plays. Let us examine this quotation that has been taken from Northrop Frye's on Shakespeare. “Perhaps the best way of finding our bearings in these mammoth structures is to look for clues in the words that are so constantly repeated that it seems clear they're being deliberately impressed on us. I'd like to look at three of these words in particular: the words, “nature,” “nothing” and “fool”(Frye 104). By close examination of these three words across the different plays and through their characters I will show how the title character in King Lear shares many similar traits in common with some of Shakespeare's other major characters.

Let us start by examining what makes the story of King Lear so sad and unfortunate. As I sat down to write this paper I couldn't help feeling like I'd heard this story somewhere before. I started racking my brain and looking through my book shelf to jog my memory. As my gaze slid across the bible I knew what biblical figure King Lear reminded me of, Lucifer. The reason I believe their similar is because they are both cast out of their original places. Forgive me if I'm making a bit of a leap here but I think it fits with the theme. Much like the Lucifer, Lear was a prominent and well respected figure before his fall from grace. Here is the first place we see Frye's examination of the word come into play. By basing the decision of his succession upon a stupidly designed test of love Lear is setting himself up for failure and heartbreak. Anyone could say they “Love” someone but it is another thing altogether to actually demonstrate it. I'm sure before his fall from grace Lucifer loved god as well. Considering the actions of his children and their “Nature” parallels can be seen between the way Lear's two oldest daughters cast him out and how god casts out Lucifer and all the others who followed him in his rebellion. All in all I can't help but think had Lear concocted a different method of deciding his successor this whole “foolish” situation could have been avoided altogether. Next I'll examine how Othello's trustful “Nature” proves his undoing.

In the story of Othello readers are presented with a faithful and brave protagonist. Othello's nature is to trust those closest to him until they betray that trust or he decides they broken their bonds with him. Admittedly the stories and characters are far different which is one of the reasons why I think King Lear still trumps Othello as Shakespeare's greatest tragedy. Lear's down fall was for the most part his own doing. Othello had in my opinion hands down the greatest villain in all of literature, Iago, to contribute to his deterioration. Iago's cunning, guile, and general ability to be deceptive trumps that of Lear's daughters by leaps and bounds. He takes advantage of these qualities by using them to play on Othello's trust in him. By exploiting Othello's trusting “nature” Iago essentially allows Othello and his friends to tear themselves apart with little to no effort on his own part. This is why I believe Othello and King Lear are very similar characters with a different name in two different stories. Their self indulgent actions allow for those around them to easily take advantage and gain what they want from these two main title characters. Now we'll move on and examine how Antony, the final character in this tragic tripod, is similar to both characters.

In one of the most epic love stories of all time we see the tragic elements of the first two characters in this paper wrapped up and demonstrated to perfection in Mark Antony. To his credit Antony is one of the most prominent figures in all of history. While his fame and fortunes are known to all those who have lived since his time this never prevented him from making the same mistakes we mere “mortals” have fallen victim to over and over again. According to Professor Michael Sexson there were three things that Antony and Cleopatra needed to do to become immortal. They needed to change what they say, see, and do. I believe that because of these things Antony becomes the perfect model to embody the tragic traits that Othello and Lear shared. Because of this Antony's fate was all but sealed when he began his love affair with Cleopatra. Another thing that I believe influenced Antony was his the lack of private time and intimacy with Cleopatra. Their relationship became more of an on stage act than a meaningful relationship which is stressful for any couple. Antony's proud nature and foolish choices left him with nothing at the end of his long and distinguished life besides being part of a story that will live on until the end of time.

The words nature, fool, and nothing are extremely important to all three characters. Its hard to say which characters natures make them bigger fools or which fool is left with nothing due to their own devices. I believe that the natures of all three characters are similar because much of what Shakespeare wrote was similar to something he had already written. Its hard to ignore the similarities between his many characters. I believe these three characters are the most tragic of all his characters that I have read and examined. Their faults only serve to make readers feel more for them when they get whats coming to them. The most glaring similarity I noticed they all seemed to be the architects of the own destruction for the most part. Granted their were extenuating characters and circumstances that played a part in their respective downfalls. Ultimately each character was solely responsible for what happened to him and has no one else to blame for their faults.

In summation I believe Frye says it best in the introduction to his book. “If we study only the historical, or 1564-1616, Shakespeare, we take away all of his relevance to our own time”(Frye 1). The point of this whole paper wass to show that while Lear may have been the most tragic of all Shakespeare's plays all three characters show the same traits and issues that make them memorable in peoples minds. Their actions and decisions left long lasting imprints up the masses of this world never to be forgotten but remembered for eternity.

Paper Thesis Idea

Well Professor Sexson wanted this by tomorow so here it is. This is only a rough thesis outline so bear with me if this is incomplete or incoherent. It will be better developed when i write my paper.

I'm going to piggy back off of Northrop Frye and his assessment of fools in Shakespeare's plays most notably King Lear. I also plan on exploring how Othello and Lear compare as fool type characters. Into this i will attempt to include how Frye analyzes nature nothing and fools and the different levels they function on. This is basically a rough cut thesis that still needs development but i will work more on it in the near future.

Cymbeline

Like always i like finding and providing the links to the audio versions of what we're reading. Here is the link to the Cymbaline librivox recording.

http://www.archive.org/details/cymbeline_1101_librivox

On Fools, Nature, and Nothing

Well now that we've finally finished King Lear I finally get around to blogging on Frye and his thoughts on King Lear. While i tried to bring up some of his ideas in class i did them no justice at all so this post is my way of making amends for that. This one might get a little lengthy so bear with me and have a little patience, thank you.

What i didn't know until i read Frye was that King Lear was the oldest of his "pseudo history/dramas". Even though Frye sets King Lear in a pre-christian setting he admits that it Still winds up with some Christian allusions. I think this is a case of author background influencing his work. Admittedly i have forgotten much of the historical information i've learned about Shakespeare he has never come off overly religious or atheistic to me. I've always figured him for someone who believed in a god or some form of god. Another interesting thing that i found out because of reading Frye's chapter on King Lear is the time that Shakespeare wrote and published King Lear it was thought to be a genuine history of the of ancient Britain. Wow either people were really dense back then or Shakespeare just didn't tell them it was completely fictitious to sell a few more tickets.

Another point that we're always bringing up in class that Frye addresses in his chapter is how Shakespeare draws on myth in this play. According to Frye the inspiration for Lear's three daughters comes from the medieval story Troilus and Cressida which is essentially a medievalized version of the Trojan War. Another interesting fact that i was unaware of before was that the very little historical evidence we have about Shakespeare indicates that King Lear was Shakespeare took more time on King Lear than on most of his other plays. I think this is obvious when someone reads this play. Like Professor Sexson said in class "This is the best of the best of the best. It doesn't get much better than this." Sorry if i miss remembered your words Professor Sexson. I can't help but agree with his assessment of this play. My first play i ever read from Shakespeare was Oedipus Rex. This started out as my favorite play, then it was Julius Caeazer, then The Tempest. But oh boy was i in for a surprise when i read King Lear. Like Nathan said in class"It rocked my world". While i know he was talking about something else this is what i felt for King Lear. Looking back at these choices and the other kinds of plays that i've read it seems like a bit of a drama/tragedy nut.

It about damn time I got to the meat and potatoes of this post. Thank you to all of you who have actually hung in and made it to this point instead of moving on to the next blog because of my random ranting. Frye says , "Perhaps the best way of finding our bearings in this mammoth structure is to look for clues in the words that are so constantly repeated that it seems clear they're being deliberately impressed upon us. I'd Like to look at three of these words in particular: the words "nature" "nothing" and "fool"." First off i know this is going to sound bad but DUH, it didn't take me reading Frye to realize that these words were obviously important otherwise Shakespeare wouldn't have used them over and over so much. Not to take away from Frye but I think a high school Freshman probably could have figured this out without much help. Now i apologize for my short Frye bashing but i felt it was needed, now to move on and praise his genius for the insight he offers us on these thoughts.

First I'm going to talk about how "Nature" functions in this play. The thing that hadn't occurred to me in considering nature in this play was what Shakespeares' audience would have thought about nature. Obviously i knew that the characters of the play knew that nature was just the environment around the but also the environment in them and the other characters of the play. There are many interesting and fun things that are done in King Lear with this idea. I'll mention a few quick examples but leave out the explanations because this post would get massive and its already to big for it's own good. Nature of relationship between Lear and all of his daughters, how that relationship evolves, the nature of the relationships between the the villains and the good guys. This is particularly interesting because the most savage betrayals are within the families themselves of this play. I think this is more than an interesting plot choice by Shakespeare. In reality it for most of us it is the things our family does that hurt us the most and so by doing this in his play Shakespeare has laid a solid base for his play and encouraged us to continue watching it. And while i know Frye goes into greater length"nature" to be so succinct with it is a great injustice that i apologize for.

The next word that Frye stresses that i'm going to explore is "nothing". I feel this is particularly important to not only the characters of the play, but to the audience to which Shakespeare wrote this play and his modern day audience us as well. When considering our discussion of "needful things" i realize that "nothing" has great bearing. When Professor Sexson first posed this question to us in class i immediatel thought well i need food, shelter, clothing, and TECHNOLOGY. After finishing our discussions on this in class i feel that my perceptions of what we as human beings need has changed slightly it has remained the same thing for the most part. I still think we need food, shelter, clothing(even if Lear didn't). The thing that i will be adding to my list now is compassion. If any of his daughters other than Cordelia had any genuine compassion for Lear we would have had a completely different play and lost the greatest tragedy i have ever read. Instead we would have had something that went more along the lines of Lear gives away his kingdom then moves in with his eldest daughter and lives happily ever after. I've ranted on this long enough, i would like to move on now to what Frye said about "nothing" and how it works in Shakespeare. According to Frye inn King Lear "nothing" seems to mean being deprived of one's social function means one is deprived of one's being. This is especially appearant in the case of Lear. Once he realizes that his power was who he was, he starts down the slippery slope to madness. It is amazingly entertaining to watch this journey as terrible as that sounds. Unlike what Professor Sexson said in class, the scene that really sells the play for me and makes it my all time favorite is the storm scene. Not only do we see a character who literally has nothing left but we see the fury, despair, and self loathing that only a character of Shakespearean design could encompass. To see this done onstage or listen to it in an audio rendition is a very powerful experience. Again i have barely touched the genius that is Frye and his thoughts on another genius Shakespeare but for the sake of anyone reading this i'm going to move on.

The final word Frye focuses on that Shakespeare uses a multitude of times in this play is fool. Like Frye i agree that the fool in this story is probably the single most intelligent and truthful of all the characters in this play. All of the decent and moral characters in this play are called fools because they function with codes of honor that the other characters in this play lack i.e. Edmund, Regan, Goneril. These characters aren't fool because, wait for it, they "live according to the conditions of the lower or savage nature they do so dwell in". I like this but i find it hard to believe because none of the villains in any other play that Shakespeare writes are nearly as black or white as the ones in this play. And at the end in the case of Edmund we are given hesitation since he attempts to undo the damage he's done. So his label of fool is initially correct but in the long run he throws it off and attempts to rectify his transgressions. The other aspect of fool that Fry says Shakespeare focuses on is "fool" as a victim. I'm paraphrasing here but Frye basically says in Shakespeare fools are people to whom all of the bad things always happen. I think this makes a lot of sense especially when you consider his other plays. Okay guys thanks for hanging in there with me for this post. I apologize it was so long but still i didn't even begin to touch all of what Frye says about this play and i would recommend reading his book because it is AMAZING!!!

Flyting

Growing up in a family of nine there is no end to the amount of "flyting" that went on. It didn't even matter if it was over something that mattered. It could have been something as petty as what to watch on tv or who got the last banana. Once the dispute was one the insults flew. Eventually when we ran out of good things to say we would find dictionaries and start looking up words in the dictionary because there were lots of great words we could abuse. Some of the best included

Narcissistic, nosy parker, fatty, fag etc. It was especially funny whenever the other sibling thought you said something bad because you chose a word that had multiple meanings and when they told on you all you had to say was thats not what i meant their making it up. Anyway this was just a quick post in response to Professor Sexson's blog assignment for this week. Looking forward to seeing everyone on Tuesday and seeing Professor Minton.

King Lear

Again i like hearing what i'm reading as a way of driving home the important points in a play. Plus this is an excellent reading of King Lear. It might not match up with the Conflated edition of the play but it should be pretty close. In addition to the audio file from Librivox i was able to find a link of Ian McKellen as King Lear that is free to watch online. I haven't watched it yet so i can't so if its any good or not.

Here is the link to where you can watch the play

http://www.pbs.org/wnet/gperf/episodes/king-lear/watch-the-play/487/

Here is the link to the audio recital of King Lear

http://www.learnoutloud.com/podcaststream/listen.php?url=http://librivox.org/bookfeeds/king-lear-by-william-shakespeare.xml&all=1&title=22362

Now with the audio link you need to open a new tab in your browser and post it there then hit enter. If you try to go directly from the link it doesn't connect you correctly.

All's Well That Ends Well

Here is the audio version. Again i like listening as well as reading what were working on so this enhances my experiece.

http://www.archive.org/details/allswellthatendswell_1008_librivox

Comedy Huh?

Like most of this class i probably find things, situations, and ideas funny that i shouldn't even though i know better. This is the mindset I'm walking into Frye's Argument of Comedy with. If this is incorrect well sorry, i guess? Anyway here we go with another random segment of random dialogue about something remotely class related.

I like the idea of the "Menandrine Tradition" even if i don't completely understand it. Maybe this is Adam Sandler's all consuming myth? Still not completely comfortable with "incest" and any sort of justification for it, scholarly or not!!! Also to remake a point i've talked about in earlier posts. I continue to feel ignorant for condeming Frye inspired/written without actually trying to understand him! My respect for him grows with every written word of his i read. The relevance of Frye's ideas and the tie in to today's writers on page 94 is a great questioning of purpose slash intent answer!!!Wow, maybe i should start reading Frye instead of watching any movies that come out since he's pretty much laid out the plots, characters and settings for me? Yikes "Sexual Communism" not even going to try and touch that one. "What tragedy gains in morality it loses in cathartic power" I like this especially since it really fits with most damned if you do damned if you don't attitudes. Definitely just "Amazoned' this book since i didn't get to finish what i was reading lol, wait just figured out it is in Frye's Anatomy of criticism. Thank you Professor Sexson for prescribing this book and myself for not throwing it away when i didn't understand it.

Well i think its about time to rap up this rant. Here's a video of what i was listening to as i did this blog

Northrop Frye on Shakespeare: The Introduction

First off let me thank whoever it was Professor Sexson asked whether or not they'd started
reading their secondary work. If they hadn't answered honestly and said no i probably wouldn't be writing this now, so to you i owe my inspiration for starting this post.

When i was first looking at secondary works for this assignment i was very unsure about which of the options Professor Sexson presented us with. My first priority was to pick something short. As much excitement as i had for this class i knew i wouldn't have a lot of time outside of it to spend reading secondary pieces. My next priority was to pick something i might actually understand. Initially i didn't think i would choose Frye because i had rough experiences with him and his Anatomy of Criticism the first time i tried to take Lit 300 with Professor Sexson a few years ago. Looking back at it now i realize it wasn't Frye's fault at all but my own struggle to grasp the material that cause the rift between Frye and myself. To my chagrin i realized the fault lie within myself and not what Frye was trying to say about literary criticism. This Brings me to the heart of this post Northrop Frye on Shakespeare.

Like i said earlier i harbored a little ill will toward Frye when i began reading the introduction to this book. Upon finishing the introduction i realized i hadn't given Frye a fair shake. This book seems like it will be extremely beneficial in my understanding of this course as it progresses. Now i'd like to move on and share some of the really interesting things i discovered in the introduction to this book which i apologize if they rehash some of what we've already talked about in class. I'm going to paraphrase some Frye here and quote it when i feel like its necessary or i can't dumb down what he's trying to say.

The first thing anyone who is reading or looking to read this book must understand is that wasn't originally conceived of as a book but came out of a course Frye was teaching on Shakespeare. The next thing Frye wants us to be conscious of is that if we explore only the historical Shakespeare he loses his relevance in our time. I enjoyed Frye's next point i felt like i shouldn't paraphrase it but give it to you directly. "One of the first points to get clear about Shakespeare is that he didn't use drama for anything: he entered into its conditions as they were then, and accepted them totally." Frye enumerates further upon this and i enjoyed how he explained that a modern day dramatist couldn't do this like Shakespeare does because there are so many external influences that we fall victim to nowadays.

The next thing i really enjoyed about the introduction was Frye's concept of "Overthought and Underthought". While i don't think i could do these ideas justice i do urge people to look into them further. Something else that is amazing about Frye's book is that he wants to remain objective. While he acknowledges that people have qualms about Shakespeare that isn't what he intends to go into or write about. Another good point Frye makes in his introductions is that no matter the setting or the characters the hero in all of Shakespeare's plays is theatre itself.

While these are only a few of the great points Frye makes in his introduction to this book i urge anyone still deciding on their secondary work to take a look at this one. I believe its going to be a great read and i look forward to hearing more of what Frye has to say about Shakespeare's works.

In What Ways does Mythology function in AYLI

Well Professor Sexson gave us a couple ideas/commands for this blog so I'll do my best to incorporate them into this Blog.

First off Professor Sexson asked us to google "Green World" and see what we come up with. The first couple entries it pops up are mostly what i would have expected to find natural seed companies and pleas to plant more trees because the earth is losing all its trees. The third result is where this whole operation starts to get interesting. Green World is the name of an album and song by the band Suicide Machines. Here are the lyrics to Green World. The band plays ska music which is a style of punk rock and if you want to learn more you can google it or check wikipedia and you'll find some very interesting stuff.

Suicide Machines Green World Lyrics:
If ignorance becomes you, then subscribe to the masses and
Just place your trust in the ALMIGHTY. Dollar
seeing green is seeing red, consumed by lust, consumed
by greed, its what they want, not what they need
if seeing green is seeing red
then seeing green is seeing death!
Take your green world, I reject your green world
Never, I couldn't. Cause everybody
knows that i just don't want it
Take your green world, I reject your green world
Never, I couldn't.
Cause everybody knows that there's no truth in it
Reject your wealth, defy your false pwer
makes you think you're so deep
but there's no truth in it
Lyrics: Green World, Suicide Machines [end]




Now i'm going to talk about how Mythology operates in As You Like it. I would like to talk a little about the Cain and Able biblical reference in AYLI. This my is timeless and still permeates many of the modern works of literature we read today. For my multicultural literature class we are reading Kite Runner and it also revolves around the Cain and Able myth as well. Its protagonist Hassan even goes as far as to invoke another biblical myth that of Abraham and Isaac. Hassan says that maybe he has to sacrifice his best friend much like Abraham almost had to do with Isaac. So there are many ways that mythology functions in AYLI. The one i find most interesting is how takes the mythology and makes usable within the context of the story. I definitely think Shakespeare knew what he was doing when he pick and chose certain biblical and mythical stories to mirror in AYLI. By no means do i believe he did this without thinking of the far reaching affects and ways in which people would read into this story based upon the examples and ideas he presented them with.

As You Like It

Again i like hearing what i'm reading since i'm an auditory/visual learner. Here is a direct link to As you like it being read by actors.

http://www.archive.org/details/as_you_like_it_0902_librivox

Commentary on Class for 2/08/2011

Hello everybody who follows this blog sorry its been awhile since my last post but i've been pretty busy. For any of you who read my blog on a regular basis this one will seem a little weird since i don't normally post notes or talk about them. I thought Professor Sexson's comments on our peer blogs were really enlightening for me personally.

Further Notes on a MSND

Sammy and Group #1 Discordance

We as readers like the resolution we got in Act V of a MSND because it is preceded by so much dissonance/discord. Ex. (Pg. 277 Lines 111-117)

Group #2 A Play Within A Play

Some good examples in other works of Shakespeare include Hamlet, The Tempest, The Taming of the Shrew. Also read Jenny's blog since she goes into further detail about this.

Group #4 The Walls

This was the group i was a part of and we focused on the walls. The walls seemed to represent the leaking of one level into another. The language, mythology, and breaching of the fourth wall to interact with the audience.

Comedies Usually End in One of Three Ways

A Dance
A Wedding
A Feast
Sometimes a combination of the previous three

Well i think that ends my summary/commentary on today's lecture. Stay alert for my next post which will focus on my secondary work which i have selected. Also i did google Lord of Misrule and you will find some interesting things just like Professor Sexson said i just don't want to ruin it for you.

A MIDSUMMER NIGHT'S DREAM

After reading this play i went out and bought this movie as a way of treating myself for finishing this play.

First things first, hats off to Geoff for crafting another amazing blog entry, dude you have to slow down or we all might end up reading your blog instead of going to class... just joking Professor Sexson.

For those who like hearing the plays they read i found this link to a free site where you can listen to A Midsummer Night's Dream. It helped me a lot because the different voices helped keep the characters straight. http://www.learnoutloud.com/podcaststream/listen.php?url=http://librivox.org/bookfeeds/a-midsummer-nights-dream-by-william-shakespeare.xml&all=1&title=34592. This is one resource that i enjoy using when i can. It breaks up the monotony of only hearing the characters in my own voice in my head. Finally we get to the heart of my post after all this random babble and rambling.

So far this semester Professor Sexson has tried to hammer home the point that Shakespeare is myth and myth is Shakespeare. Until today i personally hadn't completely bought into this theory. As i was reading the first act of A Midsummer Night's Dream and came across lines 175-176. "By all the vows that ever men have broke(in number more than ever women spoke)". As soon as i heard this i couldn't help but think of Original Sin and how Shakespeare was toying with it in this play. I'm not sure i'm correct in assuming this but it almost seems like he is poking fun at Original sing by creating a reverse Original Sin in these lines. What better way to call attention to your work than by invoking one of the greatest myths/truths depending on who you talk to. The bible is a cornerstone of western literary cannon and i think Shakespeare knows exactly what he's doing when he draws parallels to it in his work.

Whether or not my opinions are correct or not remains to be seen. If this elevates the level of my blogging awesome, if not i'm sure i'll be hearing about it whether or not i want to.

Turner's School of Night

I realize i probably should have read this at the beginning of the semester but as always i got behind and have finally caught up. All i have to say about this is wow. I realize why someone people came to so many different conclusions about this piece. One minute you think you have a grasp on this and the next it turns you on your head.

Here i begin my best effort at a scholarly or "Intelligent" reading and interpretation of Turner's School of Night. There is a lot of discussion on the subject of nothing and its significance. For some reason as i read this i was immediately reminded of the quote by Nietzche, "Battle not with monsters, lest ye become a monster, and if you gaze into the abyss, the abyss gazes also into you." What i'm trying to get at with this train of thought is that by pondering and considering nothing we become nothing. If i recall Professor Sexson's words correctly, which i might not or i remember them incorrectly, when we were discussing Borges "Shakespeare is everything and he is nothing." This seems to be where the power of creation lay because Turner quotes Hariot saying, "Out of nothing everything is made." I realize that i'm probably poaching a lot of what Turner, Professor Sexon and other people have said or alluded to on their blogs but it makes more sense now that i've read Turner for myself. So i'll give credit where credit is due and thank everyone for all their insights so far this semester.

When Dr. Sexson asked us to think of texts that are sacred to us "Scar Tissue" Anthony Kiedis's biography popped into my head. I wish i knew how to put video on this thing but i haven't quite figured that one out yet... and as i sat here typing that what would you know i figured it out. First off watch this video its amazing

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z0AXjUy1_gY

I've pretty much been obsessed with these guys since i can remember. Something about their musical style just presses my buttons. So one day i was walking through Barnes and Noble not even looking for this book and as i glanced to my left there it was. Without out even thinking i grabbed it knowing i was going to buy it. I just about had to stop myself from running out the door to go read it. Anytime someone has a love for or obsesses about something like i do about these guys they look for any little thing can about them. The book follows Kiedis early life as well as the beginnings of the band and the major events that take place. Kiedis is very much a poet in his own way. I look at many of their songs as poetry set to a beat. Any way enough of my obsessive rantings. Have a great day everybody!!!

The Rape of Lucrece

Unlike Shakespeare's other poem this one was all over the board in terms of the emotions and ideas it explored. With Venus and Adonis Shakespeare seems to focus on love, disinterest, and grief whereas this poem took on a far darker tone and explored some less appealing emotions and ideas.

I would like to start by exploring the idea of how beauty and passion are ultimately the reasons Tarquin does what he knows is wrong. Before he actually commits the volatile act that sets in motion the events of the latter half of the poem Tarquin goes through a bit of self exploration. Tarquin knows in the long run what his actions will bring about but is unable to halt the course to which his passion sets him. Lines 498-504 are a great example of this. Also i know this sounds horrible but if Lucrece hadn't been beautiful and Collantine hadn't praised her so i don't think Tarquin would been so inclined to commit the act he did.

Personally i found it a little daunting how much Lucrece goes through so quickly. The few emotions i want to talk about in this post are something most people have felt at some point in their lives. Shame, guilt, anger, frustration are just a few of the things that Lucrece goes through in the middle of this poem. The ways in which she explores them and deals with them is interesting. Take for instance when she is cursing the night for the vile act performed on her against her will. The night is an inanimate object which didn't really wrong her like Tarquin did. The idea of her suicide was also kind of off putting for me. I know she had a great love for her husband and didn't want to see his honor stained by what had happened to her, but it definitely seems like she took the easy way out unfortunately.

All in all this was a lot different from Venus and Adonis i enjoyed it for different reasons. Before this i had considered Shakespeare a great writer i never quite realized how he could diversify his talents and subject matter.

Venus and Adonis

I was sitting around today and decided that i needed to finish Venus and Adonis since i had started it the other day. Personally i found the first 600 way funnier and enjoyable to read. They definitely seemed to move faster and the ideas being conveyed in them were extremely humorous. I am going to make a broad generalization of the typical man in today's society.( so forgive guys and gals) Faced with Adonis's predicament the average male in today's society would bend over backwards to have girls throw themselves at him like Venus does with Adonis. I certainly don't think they would say no like Adonis does. This leads me into the next idea i want to explore from this poem. The idea of women dealing with rejection versus we might expect a goddess to.

Lines 835-80 "She, marking them begins a wailing note/And sings extemporally a woeful ditty/How love makes young men thrall, and old men dote/ How love is wise in folly, foolish witty/ Her heavy anthem still concludes in woe/And still the choir of echoes answer so." She pouts about being rejected like a 14 year old girl would. It would seem to me that a goddess might have a sense of dignity and class. Nope not Venus wah wah wah. I definitely understand her grief at the end since Adonis has died and there is no chance to ever see him again. This kind of reaction is plausible and understandable compared to how she deals with rejection. The other thing i found humorous about this whole ordeal was how she accusation that the earth might find Adonis so attractive that she trips him herself to steal a kiss from his lips. That was a clever idea i could not have imagined til i read this.

All in all i think that this is a great poem and it didn't play out at all like i thought it would. Shakespeare continues to amaze me and i look forward to reading Lucrece.

Another link i found this one contains a rendition of Adonis's "Nay Then" speech towards the end of the poem.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GftcE5FUrgk

Shakespeare and Me

My first experiences with Shakespeare probably happened like many people did in high school. Our teacher raved about how amazing Shakespeare was. Initially i was reluctant to embrace Shakespeare's style but eventually it won me over. Ever since then i've tended to enjoy Shakespeare more than not. I've read some of his plays and for the most part every one i read i tend to enjoy more than the one i read before. While i realize this isn't a lot of experience with Shakespeare i can only go up from here.

On a side note i found this song by a hip hop group, or at least i think they are, called Jon Solo and the incomparable Shakespeare. Here's the link if you want to check it out.

http://awkwordrap.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/tell-me-youre-crazy.mp3