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.