For Wednesday & Friday: Antony and Cleopatra, Act 1 & Paper #2 Assignment

On Wednesday, we'll watch Act One of Antony and Cleopatra in class, and then discuss it on Friday (with questions to follow). In the meantime, start thinking about your Paper #2 assignment, which I handed out in class, and is pasted below in case you lose it:

Paper #2: Tragic Reasons

In de Sousa’s Love: A Very Short Introduction, he writes, “even good reasons are never good enough. In praising a painting, a critic might adduce this ardent colour, or that graceful line, or the balance of a composition. But it will always be possible to find another painting that shares that feature, and yet fails to be good. If reasons are by definition universal, how can one really speak of such features as affording reasons?” (73-74).

In Shakespeare’s comedies, love rarely has a reason other than ‘magic’ or proximity. In the tragedies, however, characters give us very specific reasons for doing anything: falling in love, plotting revenge, planning murder, assisting their friends, etc. But are these ‘good’ reasons, or are they merely good enough? Is tragedy born from well-meaning reasons that don’t add up? Or do the reasons cause the tragedy of the play itself?  

Discuss TWO characters in the last two plays (either one from each play OR two from one) and analyze the reasons they offer the audience for their actions/decisions. These could be reasons for being in love, plotting murder, plotting revenge, assisting their friends, betraying their friends/lovers/country, etc. Is Shakespeare trying to convince us of their love/desire, or show us its fatal lack of reason? In the end, is ‘love’ enough? Or do the reasons come after, to rationalize decisions that have terrible consequences for themselves and others?

REQUIREMENTS

·       Analysis/close reading of two characters—examine their reasons and how they relate to the plot (do their reasons create the plot, complicate it, etc.)

·       If possible, find reasons that connect to one another: two characters whose reasons complement (or contradict) one another

·       At least one outside source to aid your discussion, either de Sousa (don’t use the quote above—go beyond that), or specific Sonnets

·       Due in two weeks: Friday, November 10^th by 5pm [no class]

For Monday: Othello, Acts 4-5

Last set of questions for Othello, so enjoy the rousing (and tragic) conclusion! Answer TWO or ONE, depending on your inclinations:

Q1: In Act 4, scene 3, Emilia has a fascinating exchange with Desdemona where they’re discussing if they would cheat on their husbands. How do Emilia and Desdemona differ in their willingness to make their husbands “cuckolds”? What does Emilia mean when she says, “The world’s a huge thing:/It is a great price for a small vice”?

Q2: Is Othello completely steeled to kill Desdemona in Act 5, scene 2, or does he still have doubts and misgivings? Carefully read his "It is the cause it is the cause, my soul" speech as he enters the stage. What is he telling us here, especially since it's a monologue, and addressed to himself--and by extension, to the audience?

Q3: In one of the most dramatic (though to some, comic) moments in the play, Emilia repeats the words "My husband?" four times when she learns of Iago's involvement in her mistress's death. How did you read this? How should an actress portray this? Is this total surprise/revelation? Is it disguise (if she suspected all along, and is covering her tracks)? Or is it some mixture of knowing and not knowing?

Q4: Most tragedies end in catharsis, which the Oxford English Dictionary defines as "The purification of the emotions by vicarious experience, esp. through the drama (in reference to Aristotle's Poetics)." Does Shakespeare allow the audience a sense of release and catharsis by the play's end? How might Iago's refusal to repent or even to explain his actions frustrate this? Or is that also part of Shakespeare's dramatic plan?

For Friday: Othello, Act Three

 

NOTE: No questions this time around, but we'll have another in-class writing when you arrive in class. So please read Act 3 by Friday's class, and try to think about some of the ideas we discussed in class, such as :

* Whether Iago is the "fool" of the play, and how he continues to play this role--or, who he plays it with and who he doesn't (Desdemona but not Othello?) 

* Iago's reasons for revenge...are they supported by his actions in Act 3? Contradicted?

* Does Iago actually lie and make up fabrications about Desdemona...or does he merely hint things and let Othello fill in the rest? In other words, is Iago more to blame, or Othello? 

* Is Cassio actually in love with Desdemona? Is Iago telling a half-truth when he 'lies' to Othello? Should Othello be worried? Does Desdemona herself betray any affections towards him in her language (or how she speaks it?)

ALSO, think about some of the following:

* What information do you feel ultimately turns Othello from loving husband to jealous cuckold? He tells Iago that he'll only believe when he sees prooft, but does Iago ever really offer it?

* Does Othello become more stereotypical in Act 3? Does Shakespeare offer a more racist portrait of a moor that his audience would expect? Would his portrayal in these later acts make it more and more difficult to stage today?

* What kind of woman is Emilia as she emerges from the shadows in Act 3? Is she more on Desdemona's side, or her husband's? Do you think she's in on the plot, or has Iago kept her mostly in the dark (given what he thinks of women in general)? 

For Wednesday: Othello, Act Two

NOTE: The film version of Othello we watched on Friday cut so much material that it actually fit all of Acts 1 and 2 in the 45 minutes we watched in class! So all of this material should be familiar to you from the film, but also note what was cut out, and whether or not that challenges our understanding of any of the characters and their actions (not a question, but still something to think about...)

Answer TWO of the following (or ONE, in sufficient detail to justify doing more work with less):

Q1: In one of Iago's many asides, he notes that his plan "'Tis here, but yet confused/Knavery's plain face is never seen till used" (2.1, 81). Is he claiming here that he has no real plan, but is just improvising and making it all up as he goes along? Does this suggest his true motive is not revenge at all, but a sort of obscene mischief? If he really wanted Othello dead, why wouldn't he plan things out more carefully and not put so much faith in chance? Or is he lying to us even here?

Q2: Iago claims that Cassio is in love with Desdemona, so convincing Othello of this fact should be fairly easy (especially once Desdemona starts begging him to forgive Cassio). What do we see in the play itself? How does Cassio present himself towards Desdemona? If you were an actor, how would you play him to make him an interesting character (since he could easily be just a boring straight man)? Is there some truth to Iago's claim?

Q3: How do you read the strange scene in Act 2, scene 1, where Iago disparages different kinds of women before his wife, Emilia, and Desdemona? He even makes up little riddles about them, which both delights and appalls Desdemona (his wife largely remains silent--an interesting point). Is Iago acting like a Fool in this passage? Does he have more in common with Feste? Or is he more like Malvolio, someone who refuses to be a fool even when people are laughing at him?

Q4: One of the consistent themes of this play is people seeing others as beasts or animals. We saw this in Act 1.1, when Iago portrayed both Desdemona and Othello as various animals mating with each other. Now, Cassio is constantly lamenting the loss of his reputation, which has left him "by and by a fool, and presently a beast!" (2.3.101). Why do you think these characters are so obsessed with the dichotomy between men and beasts/animals? Why does it seem that such a razor-sharp line separates one from the other? 

For Monday: Othello, Act 1

Be sure to read Act 1 of Othello for Monday's class, and as always, answer TWO of the following questions, or offer a much fuller reading of ONE. 

Q1: Iago is the consummate actor, always playing different roles for different people. This is most visible in his language, since he switches from poetry to prose several times in the act (though he mostly speaks verse). When does he switch into prose and why? How might it help him act a specific role?

Q2: In Act 1, scene 3, Brabantio (Desdemona's father) accuses Othello of using witchcraft and pagan charms to make his daughter fall in love with him. This plays into racial stereotypes of moors and Muslims at the time, as many theatrical Africans or moors were indeed witches and conjurers. How does he refute these charges to the court (and Shakespeare's audience)? In what language? 

Q3: Though Iago delights in playing people against each other for the sheer joy of doing it (or so it seems), does he ever give the audience an explanation for why he betrays Othello? Are these reasons plausible, or do you feel he might be lying to us and he's lying to Roderigo and Othello?

Q4: How might the language of Othello and much of its imagery, metaphors, etc., conjure up memories of the later Sonnets? How could we argue that Othello is a play that he wrote as he wrote Sonnets such as 130, 138, 144, and many others?  

For Wednesday: A Few Last Sonnets...

 

For Wednesday's class, read the following Sonnets from the end of the collection:

#'s 135, 136, 138 (see the variant of 138 below), 144, 145, 147 

Q1: Discuss how the various puns on the word "will" change how we read Sonnets 135 and/or 136. Do the puns make this sonnet obscene or playful? Intimate or obnoxious? Is this some "bedroom banter" between two lovers, or a way to lampoon and humiliate her?

Q2: Sonnet 138 is one of the few sonnets that come down to us in two versions, the earliest of which was published in an anthology of poems (some Shakespeare's, some other poets') called The Passionate Pilgrim. The 'original' version is printed below. What are some of the main things you notice between the two versions? Which one do you feel is more powerful?

Sonnet 138 a

When my love swears that she is made of truth,

I do believe her, though I know she lies,

That she might think me some untutored youth,

Unskilful in the world's false forgeries.

Thus vainly thinking that she thinks me young,

Although I know my years be past the best,

I smiling credit her false-speaking tongue,

Outfacing faults in love with love's ill rest.

But wherefore says my love that she is young?

And wherefore say not I that I am old?

O, love's best habit is a soothing tongue,

And age in love loves not to have years told.

   Therefore I'll lie with love, and love with me,

    Since that our faults in love thus smothered be. 

Q3: Looking at Sonnets 144 and 147, what has chiefly gone wrong with this relationship? Why does he now see the woman, which he claims to have loved deeply only a few sonnets ago, "as black as hell, as dark as night?" (147). Do we get any hint at what made her so 'dark' in his eyes? 

Q4: Sonnet 145 is considered an anomaly, and possibly, a sonnet that was not even written by Shakespeare. However, it contains a pun that seems to be autobiographical to Shakespeare alone (see if you can find it). Why do you think this simple, even sweet, poem is lodged at the end between so many fierce and nasty poems? How does it contrast with a poem like 144?

For Monday: The Sonnets, Redux!

Remember, we're returning to Shakespeare's Sonnets for one week before we plunge back into two Tragedies (Othello and Antony and Cleopatra). These poems pick up roughly where we left off, but they detail the very end of the poet's relationship with the young man, and the start of a new one with the 'dark lady.' 

Read the following Sonnets: 110, 116, 121, 126, 127, 129, 130

Answer TWO of the following, or ONE with a longer responses, that might combine one or more of the questions below:

Q1: How is the poet trying to justify himself and/or hs role in the relationship to the young man in these last poems (110-126)? Likewise, what is he accusing the young man of? Why is it clearly his fault? 

Q2: Sonnet 126 is the end of the road for the poet and the young man. How might this poem hearken back to the very first Sonnets in the series? Also, despite this echoing, what makes it unique in the entire sequence? In other words, what does it do that we've never seen before?

Q3: What is the biggest difference between the young man sonnets and the dark lady sonnets? What about the language, ideas, metaphors, or tone is most distinct in Sonnets 127-130?

Q4: Sonnet 130 is one of the most famous sonnets ever written, and certainly the most famous in this series, along with #s 18, 116, and 138. What makes this poem so memorable and quotable? How might it contrast with a similar love poem like 18? How might is also suggest how the poet has changed in the interval?

For Monday: de Sousa, Chapter 4, "Reasons"

Enjoy this little break from our Shakespeare reading before we dive back into the late Sonnets after Fall Break! 

Answer TWO of the following:

Q1: In his quest to explain our reasons for falling in love, de Sousa suggests that it “is the process of perpetual change that will preserve the continuity of love” (71). How might this complicate the notion of “love at first sight,” and even the idea that we fall in love from the outside-in? Do you agree with this?

Q2: Is the concept of love itself objectifying to women? de Sousa notes that “Some feminists have disparaged love as a cruel hoax, because no single lover has the strength to overcome the tendency to ‘objectify’ women, making their desirability contingent on their playing traditional and often submissive roles” (69).  He also cites Othello's very "gender specific" reasons for falling in love with Desdemona. So is the way we think about and experience love inherently flawed? Is there a way to love as equals?

Q3: Freud suggests that many of our emotions, particularly love, have more to do with “transference” rather than choice or reason. Do you think this helps account for love at first sight? Falling in love with someone who looks/acts like your father or mother? Or are we constantly seeking to fall in love with our first love again? Could this be true for any of Shakespeare’s lovers?

Q4: When we claim that “I want to be loved for who I am,” what does this truly mean? What is your fundamental identity? And are you able to see this as clearly as someone else (considering that anyone can see your face better than you can)? As de Sousa writes, “Whose authority counts for most in deciding what is most essential about you?” (58). What if you want to be loved for your beauty, but someone else falls in love with you for your wit? Are they seeing the “wrong” you?

For Friday: The MId-Term!

NOTE: The questions for Chapter 4, "Reasons" from Love: A Very Short Introduction will follow shortly (I don't want anyone to miss this post, so I'm keeping it at the top until after Friday). 

Shakespeare, “The Art of Love” Mid-Term Exam

The “Character” of Comedy

Answer ONE of the following questions in a short essay response, double spaced, using support from at least one of the plays, though you can use more than one (esp. on question 2) and de Sousa, if you like. This should not be a polished essay like Paper #1, but a thoughtful informal response with some attention to detail (but no more than you could do within a single class period).

Q1: Compare ONE of the characters in A Midsummer Night’s Dream or Twelfth Night to a character in a modern comedy (film or series). Explain why you think the Shakespearean character is a prototype of the modern character: what similarities do you find in their mannerisms, language, ideas, and aspirations? How does seeing the modern character through Shakespeare’s character help us understand them better? Be specific and quote from the play to illustrate ideas you see (translated) in the modern character.

Q2: Which characters in Midsummer and Twelfth Night are basically the same character? In other words, how is Shakespeare using a set of stock characters in all his comedies than he merely renames and places in different contexts? What makes these two characters so similar in their mannerisms, language, ideas, and aspirations? Also, what might we learn about one character by studying the other one? Be specific and quote from at least one of the plays to illustrate your ideas.

REQUIREMENTS

·       This is due either in class on Friday, October 6^th or by 5pm the same day, no exceptions!

·       Remember, it’s a mid-term, not a paper, so don’t try to spend too long on it or make it too perfect. But please make this longer and more detailed than a daily response question. Be thoughtful and creative. Teach us something!

·       This is worth 15 points!