Ideas from Chapter 7, "Beyond a Joke"

In class on Tuesday, I gave everyone in class one of these quotes, and had everyone write about and discuss how they were relevant to the plays in question. Remember to use Bevis as the 'frame' for your presentation. Don't just stage a modern version of Shakespeare: think about what a modern version of Shakespeare can help you say/reveal about Shakespeare's comedies. Some of these passages from Chapter 7, which we didn't read for class, might help you think about your productions and implement some great comedic ideas. Here are the passages we discussed in class (though you can use anything from the previous chapters in your presentation as well):

From Bevis, Chapter 7: “Beyond a Joke”

Page 95: The world is a comedy to those who think, and a tragedy to those who feel…Tragedy is when I cut my little finger, Comedy is when you fall into an open sewer and die (Mel Brooks).

Page 96: Comedy does not preclude tragedy, it presupposes it…humour is the instinct for taking pain playfully.

Page 98: [Don] Quixote is one of comedy’s representative heroes because he reminds us that those lacking in imagination can be too healthy.

Page 100: Such deadpan ironies can make comedy the defender of the finer feelings against which it offends. Perhaps it even elicits these feelings in the reader by affecting to disregard them.

Page 100: Luigi Pirandello claims that humour is ‘the feeling of the opposite…’ almost a mirror in which feeling looks at itself.’ Modern comedy often stages mixed feelings about feelings themselves.

Page 102: Comedy is a kind of second glance, a moment in which somebody is caught hold of—or catches hold of themselves—as trivial yet also larger than life.

Page 104: ‘The essential achievement of modern art,’ explained Thomas Mann, ‘is that it has ceased to recognize the categories of the tragic and the comic…and sees life as tragicomedy”…

Page 104: Nell points out in Beckett’s Endgame (1957) that ‘Nothing is funnier than unhappiness, I grant you that. Yes, yes, it’s the most comical thing in the world.’

Page 105: Thomas Nagel sees the absurd as a three-stage drama: armed with ideals, policing yourself with purposes, you are leading your life (or, rather, pursuing it); then, suddenly, you are caught off guard by a sense of your life’s idiocy, or triviality, or futility; and then, since you cannot do very much as a mere spectator of your life, you go back to living it…

Page 105: Our very sense of the absurd is an achievement because it shows that we are able to transcend ourselves in thought, yet also a predicament because it seems to involve falling into old mistakes in new ways.

Tips for Final Projects!

I gave this handout in class on our last day (Tuesday), but if you missed it or misplaced your handout, here are some ideas to consider as you go into your final project. Be sure to look over the links in the posts beneath this one, since they give you valuable resources to help you piece together your production. 

1.       Be sure to research some previous productions of your play, which you can find on the RSC archive (on the blog) or elsewhere on the web. Look up reviews of your play and see what critics thought worked and didn’t work. The more you understand how the play has been ‘solved’ by others, the more you can come up with your own solution.

2.       Be sure to ask yourself ‘why?’ when it comes to your setting and location. What purpose does it serve? What problems does it solve? Is it a gimmick, or does it actually help us ‘see’ something in the play or between the characters?

3.       Use Bevis to find a ‘direction’ for the play. By this I mean, consider what ideas of comedy you want this play to explore or illustrate. All of these plays are comedies, but not everyone will see the joke. So think about how Bevis shows us multiple ways to think about and understand what comedy is and what it does to an audience. Imagine that Bevis’ ideas are your thesis: try to state this thesis in a sentence or two in your presentation.

4.       Find VISUALS. Make sure we can see examples of what your play would look like. You don’t need to find a production to show us, but you can find examples of the kinds of people, the costumes, the landscape, etc., that would evoke your staging.

5.       Show us a PROBLEM moment in the play that you can briefly discuss and maybe solve for us. In fact, your entire presentation could be a single problem scene that you explain through your modernization/staging.

6.       You only have TEN MINUTES, and you really can’t cover that much ground in ten minutes. So make sure everything you show us is meaningful—that it actually leads somewhere. Don’t waste frames and time on a portrait of Shakespeare, or something that is ‘throw away.’

PLEASE let me know if you have questions, if you don’t know how to do something, or you find yourself stuck. I’m here to help! Good luck!

Final Project Videos and Our Flipgrid Site

NOTE: The last questions for The Merchant of Venice are in the post below this one! 

I’ve made a Flipgrid account for our class: Shakespeare's Comedies. Here's the link to our class' site: https://flipgrid.com/4wn3lvz5

I gave everyone in class permission to join the group, but if you have problems doing so, the code to join is "4wn3lvz5.” So go to flipgrid.com and put in the code, and then join with your ECU e-mail (it will ask you for a Google or Microsoft account—ECU is Microsoft). 

When you get to the site, you'll see 1 topic called "Final Project Posts." That's where you'll post your presentation as a "response." Once you click on the topic, there's a big red button that says "Record a Response." Once you click on that, you can either upload a video you've already recorded (on Zoom, Powerpoint, etc.) as long as it's no more than 10 minutes long (that's the limit for Flipgrid, and thus, this assignment). Or you can record your video right here on Flipgrid, using the "Share Screen" option to narrate over your Powerpoint. Here's how to do that:

1. Make sure your Powerpoint or other presentation is open on your desktop

2. When you click on "Record Response," and your image appears, click on the "Options" tab and then choose "Record Screen." 

3. Click on "Start Screen Recording" and then choose "Window." Click on your presentation and then choose "Share." 

4. Once you do that, the recording starts, so get ready to talk! You can also start recording before you share the screen (Flipgrid will give you a 3-second countdown if you do it this way, so you know to get ready). Afterward, you can edit the presentation, delete it, or continue.

5. If you like it, click "Next" and you'll be asked to include a selfie (you can take one on the spot or use an image from your presentation) and some information about the video. And then you're ready to post! 

Here's a video that walks you through recording a video to Flipgrid if my information isn't as clear as it needs to be: 

REMEMBER, though, you only have 10 minutes. You can do a lot in 10 minutes, but it's also not as much time as you think, so be succinct and try to hit all of your points quickly. Imagine that you're trying to sell your idea to a director or acting group; they wouldn't want to hear too much, and you would have to interest them almost immediately. So hit the main points, be specific, and that's it. 

I posted a video as an example of how a presentation might look. Mine isn't perfect, and I rush a bit at the end, but it gives you an idea of the main points you might hit. Be sure to include something about previous productions (you can find that on the RSC links in a post below), ideas from Bevis, your ideas about modernizing the play, and at least one problem scene and how you intend to solve it. In general, lean on your Paper #3 assignment; that's the genesis of this project. You shouldn't have to do much more work, just show and explain your ideas. 

The final project is due the last Friday of finals week, May 7th by 5pm. So you have plenty of time! 

Good luck and let me know if you have questions! 

For Tuesday: The Merchant of Venice, Acts 3-5

LAST SET OF BLOG QUESTIONS! Answer TWO for next week: 

Q1: Why is Shylock’s famous speech in Act 3, Scene 1 in prose? It contains some of the most famous lines in Shakespeare...so why isn’t it glorified in imabic pentameter? Also, we know Shylock can and will speak in verse, so why does he opt for prose in this speech—and in this entire scene? Why might it important to highlight this for the audience?

Q2: Are we meant to feel sympathy for Shylock in Act 4, Scene 1? While Shakespeare’s audience would have naturally cheered for Portia’s victory (this is a comedy, after all!), could Shakespeare have writing against the grain of audience expectations? Consider Shylock’s final words, “I am content,” and “I am not well.” Given his earlier confidence, are these comically brief...or concisely tragic?

Q3: Act 5 opens with an extended scene of love banter with Jessica and Lorenzo. Using the footnotes on the side, what makes these allusions to Cressida, Dido, and Thisbe somewhat surprising? How might this scene suggest Jessica’s state of mind after fleeing her father’s house and finding herself in the Christian world of Belmont? Is this ‘happily ever after’ for her, or is she constantly looking over her shoulder?

Q4: In Act 4, Scene 1, Portia tells Shylock, “in the course of justice none of us/should see salvation” (155). Does she offer the same compassion to her own husband in Act 5? What do you make of her bizarre interrogation of Bassanio, which culminates in her claming she has slept with Balthazar, the lawyer, to obtain the ring? Does she feel betrayed by Bassanio...or is she toying with him the same way she toyed with Shylock during the trial scene?

The Dramaturgical Presentation: Modernizing Shakespeare

INTRO: A drama-what? A “Dramaturg” is a scholar who works with a theater company to understand the textual, historical, and political ideas behind a given play. This is particularly important for older plays, like Shakespeare’s, since the audience (and the actors) often don’t know very much about this world: who lived there, what life was like, what they cared about and found funny, etc. Daniel Mesta, in his article “Theatre’s Secret Weapon: A Closer Look at Dramaturgy,” writes: “Curiosity is one of a dramaturg’s most crucial traits. Sometimes, both with new plays and familiar ones, asking the right questions can make or break a production. Dramaturgs ask, “What are the rules of the world? What are the relationships between characters? How does time work in the world of this play?” As the source of limitless questions, dramaturgs allow playwrights, directors, designers, and actors to expand their understanding of the script and create a world that is cohesive and accessible” (dramatics.org).

PROMPT: For your final project, I want you to be the Dramaturg for an ECU production of the play you wrote about in your Proposal assignment (Paper #3). To do this, you will put together a short PP presentation (or similar) of no more than 10 minutes, which you should record yourself narrating. This presentation should be aimed at the director/actors, explaining how you propose to make the play more accessible and interesting to the audience with a little adaptation. Ideally, you should draw from your Proposal assignment: why this play, where will you stage it, what basic theme or idea does the play need to communicate, and what are some of the problem scenes, etc.? So be CURIOUS, ask the RIGHT QUESTIONS, and give PROVOCATIVE ANSWERS to your actors and audience. Make these plays FEEL NEW and EXCITING and not just “warmed over Shakespeare.”

Your presentation should include MOST or ALL of the following:

• Why stage this play? Why not just keep doing the more popular ones?
• Visual examples of what your setting would look like, of what certain characters should look like, or other aspects that help us ‘see’ your vision
• Why this setting? What theme or idea are you trying to put across? What do you want the audience and actors to essentially understand about this play?
• A passage or two from Bevis’s Comedy to show how some of his ideas might have influenced you, or helped you understand Shakespeare’s intentions
• Brief summaries of 1-2 recent productions that staged this play, and how this influenced your own staging
• Brief discussion of at least ONE problem scene, and how you might address it: include brief but focused CLOSE READING (don’t just summarize)
• Discussion of some common misconceptions of the play, or misconceptions about Shakespeare that you can address in your staging

REQUIREMENTS: Remember, this is a presentation, not a paper. So I want you to RECORD the presentation with you narrating it, like a real presentation. Imagine that you’re addressing the director and the actors, and letting them know the WHAT, the HOW, and the WHY of the play. I’m going to set up a Flipgrid account for our class, so you can either record and upload it there, OR you can simply send me a video file and I can do it for you. But remember, make sure you base your presentation on a PP, Prezi, or other format so we can SEE the visuals and the words, as well as hear your narration. Due on the last day of Finals, date TBA! (May something or other).

NOTE: I will post a video soon showing my take on this assignment, and how you might go about creating your presentation. And if you have questions, please ask! 

Some Resources for Paper #3

 If you need some ideas for 'modernizing' your play, or simply to think about problem scenes and ideas, here are some useful resources!

PAST ROYAL SHAKESPEARE COMPANY PRODUCTIONS:

This link has clickable productions from 1960 to the present, showing every time a play has been performed, and some of the production notes and photos outlining how it was performed and some adaptations that were made. Some entries have more detail than others, but note that, for example, The Comedy of Errors was only performed FOUR times in 60 years (!) by the RSC, most of them recently: in 1996, 2005, 2010, and 2012. So this tells you that it used to be totally ignored, but has now become almost popular--maybe an undiscovered gem among Shakespeare's plays?

THE LINK: https://www.rsc.org.uk/about-us/history/past-rsc-productions

THE GLOBE THEATRE WEBSITE

This showcases plays that are performed at the reconstructed Globe Theatre in London, where Shakespeare actually performed many of his plays. They always do a more 'traditional' staging, though minus boy actors, yet still try to incorporate modern ideas and practice. Note that on May 20 they feature "Anti-Racist Shakespeare: A Midsummer Night's Dream," a free webinar about race and Shakespeare's play. Many of these events can be streamed at home, some for free, and some for normal ticket prices. But it gives you a sense as to what plays are being performed and how in Shakespeare's 'home.' 

THE LINK: https://www.shakespearesglobe.com/

 LOVE TROUBLE

A review about a 2013 production of A  Midsummer Night's Dream, noting some of the uncomfortable issues in the play, notably: "In the playing, of course, much of the venomousness comes across — as it should — as hyperbolic, and therefore comic. And it’s of course true that Titania, Lysander and Demetrius have all been led into their romantic follies not by the yearnings of their own hearts, but by the manipulations of magic."

THE LINK: https://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/31/theater/the-light-and-dark-of-a-midsummer-nights-dream.html

THE MERCHANT OF VENICE: A PROTEST WITHIN A PLAY

An article about the Habima Theater's production of The Merchant of Venice in Hebrew at the Globe Theatre in 2012. It caused a large protest which almost spilled onto the stage. As the author writes, "The thought that crossed my mind, as I watched events unfold on the stage and in the auditorium, was not so much how resonant the themes contained within Shakespeare's play still are, but what protests, if any, would The Merchant of Venice have provoked had it been written today and not more than 400 years ago?"

THE LINK:  https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-18262621

THE TAMING OF THE SHREW: THIS IS NOT A WOMAN BEING CRUSHED

A review of a 2012 production with interviews by the actors, asking them what kind of play this really is. As one actor notes, "Hall doesn't think Shakespeare was being misogynistic in portraying female subjugation, but questioning the values of society. "He's challenging an audience's expectations of how a woman is supposed to behave. What if, as a human being, she doesn't want to roll over, as was expected in Shakespeare's day? I actually think he's championing the woman's rights."

THE LINK: https://www.theguardian.com/stage/2012/jan/17/taming-of-the-shrew-rsc 

POWER AND GENDER IN THE TAMING OF THE SHREW

An article from the British Library with many historical document giving context about Shakespeare's time and intentions. A great overview of many of the controversial issues, and how they could be understood in light of Shakespeare's age. 

THE LINK: https://www.bl.uk/shakespeare/articles/power-and-gender-in-the-taming-of-the-shrew# 

WHY SHYLOCK SHOULD NOT BE CENSORED 

A New York Times article from 1974 tackling the problematic question of Shylock, and why he's still relevant to the stage (and our lives). 

THE LINK: https://www.nytimes.com/1974/03/31/archives/why-shylock-should-not-be-censored-tv.html 

Blog Response #6: Adapting Shakespeare and The Merchant of Venice, Acts 1-2

 The video below is less about The Merchant of Venice (though I talk about it at the end) than an introduction to the idea of adapting Shakespeare, with an eye toward your Paper #3 assignment. I'll be posting more links and tips for doing this assignment and the Final Project to follow soon. For now, watch this video and COMMENT below, and then be sure to read Acts 1-2 of The Merchant of Venice for next week. See you then!

Paper #3: Final Project Proposal

Your third paper is a kind of ‘abstract’ to your Final Project, suggesting what you might want to do, or explore, in that larger assignment (see that assignment below). Since the final project will focus on the modernization and performance of a single play, I want you to choose ONE of the four plays from this class to focus on. Imagine which play you would most like to see performed in a modern production, and which of the four you think a modern audience would most benefit from seeing live.

The Proposal should do three things, and can be much more informal than the typical English paper: 

1.       Explain why you think this play is the best candidate for a modern production: why you think the audience needs to see it, or why the play is underappreciated or could expand our notion of Shakespeare’s writing.

2.       Suggest an alternative (more modern) setting for the play that makes sense to an audience. Instead of Ephesus or Athens, for example, why not Las Vegas or Cancun? Or a historical period, such as 1930’s Chicago (gangsters) or Studio 54 in the 70’s (in NYC). Explain why this setting (with its appropriate costumes) would help your audience see the characters and the comedy that Shakespeare intended.

3.       Identify 2 or 3 potential “problem scenes” in the play. But “problem,” I’m referring to scenes where you think the audience would have trouble with the content, the language, the characters, or some other element (is it sexist? Racist? Too confusing?). It doesn’t have to be the entire scene, necessarily, but explain why a specific passage might have to be changed, adapted, edited, or cut slightly. You can’t re-write lines, but you can adapt them (delete lines, remove a character, combine characters, etc.). Be SPECIFIC. Don’t just say that something is too confusing or too sexist; explain why and where you see it. You don’t have to offer elaborate changes, but suggest how you might approach it.

For this assignment, you don’t have to use any secondary sources, but think about Bevis’ ideas throughout. I’m only interested in seeing you talk shop here: tell me the what, why, and where of each play. And that’s it. However, the more thought you put into this assignment, the easier the final project will be. No page limit, but this due IN-CLASS ON TUESDAY, APRIL 13^th. This will be our primary focus in class that week, and I’ll give you a break from the reading/questions/videos.

For Next Tuesday: The Taming of the Shrew, Acts 3-5

Sorry for the delay--I've been having connection issues with my new laptop! But no fears--you questions have arrived! After you read Acts 3-5, answer TWO of the following questions for Tuesday's class. 

Q1:Petrtuchio's method to tame Katherine is similar to how an Elizabethan gentleman would prepare a wild falcon for service: "My falcon now is sharp and passing empty,/And, till she stoop, she must not be full-gorged,/For then she never looks upon her lure" (151). Why might Shakespeare have Petruchio dehumanize Katherine in this manner? If they are both intellectual equals (as Act 2 seems to prove), why does he take this course of action, rather than trying to win her through love and affection? if this is a comedy, why would Shakespeare resort to such brutal tactics to bring together his two protagonists? 

Q2: Why after several scenes of Katherine refusing to play Petruchio's game, does she suddenly give in and proclaim, "be it moon, or sun, or what you please./And if you please to call it a rush candle,/Henceforth I vow it shall be so for me" (187)? He she finally been broken by his gaslighting? Or is there another way to read her abrupt about-face? Do her words sound convincing? How would you advise the actress playing her to say or to act around them? 

Q3: Though Katherine is the most prominent woman in the play, Bianca is more interesting than she first appears. Though she seems like the "nice" sister, is this completely true? How does she using her charm to work against her would-be suitors and get her way? And how does she seem to feel about her new husband by Act 5? Is this a love match? Any clues? 

Q4: In Karen Newman's essay, "The Taming of the Shrew: A Modern Perspective" (in the back of the book), she notes that "The convention of mistaken identity...is not only a plot device in the play, but also works thematically to undermine notions of an essential self or a fixed identity" (235). Why might it be important than both Christopher Sly, the suitors, Katherine, and Lucentio's father, Vincentio, are all changed into something they're not? What might Shakespeare by saying to his audience that anyone, from the lowliest servant to the greatest lord, can wake up one day and not be who they think they are? 

Q5: (one more for good measure!): Why do you think the Induction scene doesn't return at the end of the play? There is another version of this play (but probably not by Shakespeare) where they bring back the character of Christopher Sly. However, after Act 1, he's never mentioned again, and surely this wasn't an oversight on Shakespeare's part. Would returning the frame story benefit the play? Or ruin it? 

For Next Week: The Taming of the Shrew, Induction + Acts 1-2

Be sure to read the first two acts (plus the brief Induction that opens the play) for next week, even though there are NO questions or video to watch. However, here are some ideas to consider for next week, and we'll open the class by examining a specific scene in the play. See you then!

* Why does the play open with the brief Induction that makes the entire play seem 'fictional'? How does this compare with Act 5 of A Midsummer Night's Dream? 

* Also, why are the characters in the Induction English (English names and English locations), but the play itself is Italian? Why do you think Shakespeare made that distinction? 

* The Taming of the Shrew has a mixture of poetry and prose, but in the first 2 acts, almost no rhyming verse. The verse is almost exclusively blank verse, with only a few lines here and there that rhyme (usually at the end of a speech or scene). Why do you think this is, particularly considering A Midsummer Night's Dream was full of it?

* Why might this play illustrate Bevis' idea that you are what people say you are? Where do we see that in the play? (or possibly, where don't we?)

* Where do you see some obvious echoes or connections to the previous plays, particularly in characters and the roles they play? Based on this, do you think The Taming of the Shrew was written after or before our previous plays (or in-between them?). 

* How seriously does Shakespeare treat the business of love and marriage in this play? Do we find people sincerely in love, or it all a game, or an act? How can we tell?

* How do you read the sparring match between Petruchio and Katherine? Is it meant to be angry and threatening? Or light-hearted and flirtatious? Is he really trying to marry her, or just playing a game? Is she offended, or flattered, by his attention? 

* Is Petruchio more like Oberon or Robin (someone who mischievously tries to control others), or is more like Dromio and Bottom (someone who is a wise fool--silly, but wiser than he seems)?  

Spring Break: Read Acts 1-2 of The Taming of the Shrew (and recap below)

Since we don't have class next week, go ahead and read at least the first TWO acts of The Taming of the Shrew. I won't give you any questions since it's Spring Break, but I will give you some ideas to think about early next week to help your reading. Don't forget that Paper #2 is due THIS FRIDAY! Let me know if you have any questions.

Here is a little recap and some passages that are pertinent to our discussion on Tuesday: 

JUST A JOKE

• Page 78 (Bevis): People often say, "oh, I'm only joking," or "he's just kidding" but are often serious nonetheless. Jokes are often geared to wound. As Bevis writes, behind the smile is a socialized snarl...real snarls and real fights.
• Page 78: Is the term "playful anger" an oxymoron? How can anger be playful? Anger becomes playful or funny because it seems antithetical to play--it CAN'T be harmless, can it? But it can...it can be used to make us laugh.
• Page 80: What really makes us laugh? Two theories: Superiority Theory and Incongruity Theory? One suggests we laugh because we feel superior to the 'fools' on stage; the other, that we laugh because things are so absurd and out of place. How else CAN we respond? One or the other? A mixture of both?

THE USES OF SATIRE

• "Satire" comes from old Greek satyr plays, which were comedies about half men, half goats that mocked the audience. The idea is that you see both your human and your animal side on stage--reason and illogic. 
• Page 79: The point of satire: change the name and you are the subject 
• Page 81: Like TICKLING--both pleasure and pain. 
• Page 81: BIG—to send something up is not necessarily to put it down; which means, a satire isn't necessarily mean-spirited. You can lampoon something you love in order to see it better, or to point out its obvious flaws. Indeed, can we love something WITHOUT flaws? Don't we have to see something for its flaws and all? Does comedy helps us see the world in a human light in exactly this way? 
• Page 91: "Bad behavior"—so wrong it’s right. We often like to act badly in private, or in a space that allows us to do the 'wrong' thing. Why we like horror movies? Because they allow us to see people die and commit murder without committing a crime? Or experiencing terror without real danger? 
• Comedian George Carlin: likes bringing the audience across the line, having them happy I did...but where is the line drawn? And how far can we go without becoming 'monsters'?

ASKING THE WRONG QUESTIONS!

• Page 84: Composer John Cage was asked if there was too much suffering in the world. His response: “I think there's just the right amount.” Why is this COMEDY? Why is he acting like a "fool" here? 
• Page 81: PHILOSOPHY—“things aren’t so bad, it could be worse”: comedy as complacency? 
• Volatire's 1759 novel, Candide: the main character is constantly told "we live in the best of all possible worlds," even though he witnesses murder, torture, rape, and worse. His response: “yikes, so what are the other worlds like?”
• Page 85: TO BE A WITNESS IS AN ACCOMPLICE: why are we 'guilty' simply by watching the events on stage? 
• Page 85: Comedy a force for good? OR merely to question what “Good” might be? And who gets to choose?
• Page 91: Not to degrade humans; to remind them they already ARE!

For Next Week: Bevis, Comedy (Chapters 5 & 6) and Re-Cap of Tuesday's class

Answer TWO of the following:

Q1:  According to Bevis, why are the most comic characters usually the "low class" characters? What makes the lower classes "funnier" to audiences, and how does Shakespeare seem to acknowledge this? Is the still true today, when we have less class distinctions than Shakespeare's time did (or than even the British do today)?

Q2: In Chapter 6 Bevis writes that "Behind the smile, then, maybe a socialized snarl; and behind the laugh, a play fight. But behind both of these facial expressions lie real snarls and real fights" (78). How might comedy suggest or cover up real aggression and anger in the play--and in society? Why might, in a way, comedy be the angriest of all genres? (You might think of stand-up comics who are very angry and confrontational in their routines--yet we still laugh at them). 

Q3: In Chapter 5, we get a famous quote from Freud: "the joke is essentially a double-dealing rogue who serves two masters at once" (69). What does this mean? How can a "rogue," or a comic servant like Dromio or Bottom serve "two masters"? What gives them power within the play?

Q4: On some level, all comedy is voyeuristic--meaning it's a spectacle created for our own titilation and enjoyment. And if we're the intended audience, that means we're also an accomplice; we're not innocent by the things on stage that offend us or are offensive to others. As Bevis writes, "to be a witness is to be an accomplice" (85). How might this work in A Midsummer Night's Dream? Where is the audience an "accomplice"?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 

IDEAS/PASSAGES FROM TUESDAY'S CLASS

THE LANGUAGE OF LOVE

* Page 79 : Titania speaks in couplets to Bottom ! Never spoke like this before. A spell, but also the "cliched" love of the lovers...no longer HER speech or HER thoughts

* Page 83: Robin: “My mistress with a monster is in love”; reminding us that she sees a 'monster' or in this case, a man with an ass-head, as her dearest love on earth. We know this isn't so, since she loved her friend and her friend's child, the Changeling, yet she willingly gives this up for 'love.' But is that really what she wants? What she LOVES?

* Page 93: Helena: "O Spite! O Hell!" Can only see their vows of love as comic, mocking...a ‘bad’ performance, like Bottom and the others trying to perform their play. Their 'sincere' love looks ridiculous because they're not being sincere--it's a trick, a spell, and not a true protestation of love. Fake language. 

* Page 97: What real love sounds like: Helena’s chiding of Hermia in blank verse. They had a real relationship and an actual history. So when she speaks to Hermia, she does so in blank verse, her own language. She becomes a real character here. 

THE TRAGIC END!

* Page 103: The all-out war—the women fighting, the men fighting with each other: funny, but also tragic?

* Page 125: Note that Titania not only gives away the child, but no longer speaks in blank verse; she responds to Oberon in couplets again, even after he humiliates her: “There lies your love!” He has broken her...she is now submissive to him (127). 

* Page 133: THE WOMEN DON’T SPEAK! Demetrius 'mansplains' for them: “And will forevermore be true to it." Even when Theseus offers to marry them, they say nothing...so what are they doing in their silence? How do they respond? Shakespeare doesn't tell us. Remember this, because we'll see this again in our next two plays--major characters who fall silent by the end of the play. 

ACT 5: THE PLAY WITHIN THE PLAY (we'll talk more about this on Tuesday)

* Page 143: Theseus (a mythical character) says this events are too unbelievable! Ironic! 

* Page 147: "The Tragedy of Pyramus and Thisbe," a play that is advertised as short and tedious; tragical and merry! Ridiculous! BUT ISN’T THIS PLAY THE SAME WAY? Couldn't the play they're mocking be a satire of their own play? 

* Page 149: HIPPOLYTA—the only voice of dissent; she doesn’t want to watch it, begs them to stop, but they laugh right over her. She is the only woman who gets to speak in Act 5. 

* Page 151: The crazy prologue: “offending with good will!” Like this play??

 

Paper #2: Seeing Double (due Friday, March 12th)

NOTE: Blog Response #3 for A Midsummer Night's Dream is in the post below this one...

“...our understanding of comic character could be heard as a response to the Socratic imperative, “Know Thyself.” Comedy, if it were a character, might reply: “To thine one selves be true,” or “To one’s own conflicts be true” (Bevis 43).

 

INTRO: Both The Comedy of Errors and A Midsummer Night’s Dream  are early Shakespeare comedies, and follow very similar formulas of tragic openings, main characters getting lost in an unfamiliar environment, confusions of identity leading to a comic climax, and a happy ending of reunion and marriage. Not surprisingly, the plays also share many of the same kinds of characters, down to two pairs of lovers, tyrannical dukes, buffoonish servants, and betrayed (and powerless) women.

 

PROMPT: So for your second paper, I want you to examine two characters from each play who seem to echo one another by their characters, conflicts, and language. How is Shakespeare using a specific type in both plays to advance his comedy and bring out some of the same ideas about love, identity, marriage, acting, and understanding? There are some obvious comparisons that work very well, such as Adriana & Luciana / Hermia & Helena (and Titania?); the two Antipholuses / Lysander & Demetrius; the Dromios / Robin; the Duke / Theseus & Oberon, etc. But you aren’t limited to these—you can use any two characters that you feel are variations on the same type and are used for the same effect.

 

FOCUS: Your paper should also do TWO things: (a) examine at least one speech from each character (long or short), to show us how each one performs their character in language. In Shakespeare, what people say is more important than what they do. And (b) use a passage or two from Bevis’ Comedy to help us see the comedic elements at work in each character. Don’t assume that we can see how each character is similar—show us through your analysis of the text and the connections between each characters’ language. Don’t forget to consider how they use prose, and verse (and blank verse vs. rhymed verse).

 

REQUIREMENTS

* page limit optional—but enough to make your point

* use one character from each play—no more

* analysis of at least one speech from each character (you can use another line or two for context or comparison, but you should primarily focus on one speech)

* some use of Bevis to help illustrate your ideas

* DUE FRIDAY, MARCH 12th by 5pm

 

Blog Response #3: The Language of Love in A Midsummer Night's Dream

Here's a blog video that focuses primarily on Act 3 of A Midsummer Night's Dream, but be sure sure to read all five acts for Tuesday's class. We'll talk about the other parts in class. Be sure to leave a comment by Tuesday! 

Recap of Tuesday's Class: A MIdsummer Night's Dream, Acts 1-2

In Tuesday's class, I went over the handout on The Comedy of Errors a few posts below, and we also discussed how a comedy's "happy ending" doesn't necessarily give everyone a happy life. In fact, for some people--notably, Adriana--the play is shaping up to be quite a tragedy! Would you want to spend the rest of your life with Antipholus of Ephesus? 

I'll post a new video on Wednesday or Thursday for Acts 3-5, so get reading! :) 

Here are some other ideas from A Midsummer Night's Dream, Acts 1-2, some of which we discussed and others we didn't get to: 

LOVE AS POSSESSION/RAPE

* Page 7: Theseus—I wooed thee with my sword and by wounding you; now I want to have you! Is this love? Has he enslaved her? Raped her? What kind of marriage is this...and why open the play with a forced marriage between two mythological figures, Theseus (a hero of legend) and Hippolyta (an Amazon)?

* Page 9: Egeus, the father, on his daughter, Hermia: she is mine, I may dispose of her to this gentleman, or give her to death. Again, opening a comedy with the threat of death and tragedy. How else does the beginning of this play echo The Comedy of Errors? 

* Page 11: Theseus: A woman is but a form of wax, imprinted and within his power to figure or disfigure it. Do you think this is a common belief of the time...Shakespeare's own belief...or a way to make Theseus an evil, threatening figure? 

* Page 39: Oberon echoes Theseus and Egeus in his actions and language: am I not thy lord? Why are the men so possessive of their women? Why in a comedy are they all threatening their wives/daughters, or willing to kill them for non-compliance? 

* Page 47: Oberon threatens a kind of rape against his wife, Titania—I’ll have her fall in love with a beast! He would willingly see her mate with a beast in order to have his revenge (yikes!) 

* Page 49: Demetrius does the same to Helena, who is following him through the woods--he threatens to rape her if she doesn't go away. Sadly, she seems up for that, if only to stay near him(!) 

LOVE AS SIGHT

* Page 13: Helena: I look the same; have the same wealth; am as well connected—why not me? What IS love based on this play? What do people fall in love with, when they seem to fall in love at first sight? 

* Page 21: The difference between Helena and Hermia—just that all men love Hermia and none love Helena; but why? What makes her better? Why do both Lysander and Demetrius prefer Hermia? 

* Page 23: Helena: “Love looks not with the eyes but with the mind.” What does this mean? Do we CHOOSE to love, or is it involuntary (by Cupid)? How can it be "with the mind" if it's at "first sight"?

* One possible answer: If we fall in love with the sight of the beloved, then why doesn't everyone fall in love with them? Other people don't see what we do...which means it IS in the mind; that we see what we WANT to see, rather than what is there. That's why we overlook the flaws and inconsistencies of our lovers (and why Helena can ignore the horrors of Demetrius). Maybe why Hippolyta can marry Theseus despite his own monstrosity? Or does she do any of this willingly? 

LOVE AS STORY

* Page 15: The course of true love never did run smooth...they only know love through the stories they read. How might this lead you to strange ideas about love, and how to love, and who to love? 

* Page 17: Reciting all the stories they know; it’s our duty to bear these wrongs like the other lovers in history/story (they act like people in stories instead of themselves--goes back to Bevis and identity "we prefer to be they people we're not"

* Page 19: Hermia swears on tragic and false lovers: Dido and Aeneas’ false vows...why would she make love vows on failed lovers? Foreshadowing? 

THE MUSIC OF LOVE

* Page 19: All the lovers speak in rhymes: the cliche of love? To speak by the book? None of them are distinguished? All are interchangeable?

* Page 25: The Prose of the Players...vs. Bottom’s silly verse for Hercules

* Page 35: Robin’s speech—the sing-song verse

* Page 39: Oberon and Titania—no verse, not in love; equals in power

* Page 51: Oberon’s spell—all rhymed verse

* Page 53: Actual songs—why? How should this play ‘sound’?

For Next Week: A MIdsummer Night's Dream, Acts 1-2

NOTE: A Midsummer Night's Dream is a play that is constantly pitting different worlds against one another: the word of the forest (Oberon, Titania, Puck, etc.) vs. the world of upper-class Athens (Theseus, Hermia, Lysander, etc.) vs. the world of lower-class Athens (Bottom, Flute, Snout, etc.). To complicate matters, Theseus and Hippolyta are figures from Greek myth, though they exist side-by-side with the upper and lower-class characters in Athens who are really characters from Shakespeare's England. When these worlds mix, chaos--and comedy--ensue. 

Answer TWO of the following:

Q1: How do the paired lovers discuss the rules and ideals of love in Act One? Consider especially Helena's speech in 1.1, and Egeus' complaint to Theseus at the beginning of the play. Also, consider how characters play with the metaphor of "love as sight" throughout the first Act. For example, Hermia says, "I would my father looked but with my eyes," and Helena says, "Were the world mine, Demetrius being bated,/The rest I'd give to be to you translated" (1.1). 

Q2; How do the "rustics" (the low class players) satirize the idea of acting and perhaps of Shakespeare's own theater, esp. in Act 1, scene 2? What are the consistently getting wrong about how to act and how to stage a play? And what makes their attempts at staging a classical tragedy funny? What might Bevis say about this? 

Q3: Read Titania's speech in 2.1 carefully. What does this say about her character and about the nature of love itself? How does it offer a commentary on many of the themes/metaphors of Act 1? 

Q4: Though prose and verse are pretty strictly followed in these Acts (verse for upper class, prose for lower), the use of verse often breaks from imabic pentameter into couplets and songs. Why does Shakespeare employ so many variations of poetry throughout Acts 1 and especially 2? 

Handout for The Comedy of Errors, Acts 3-5

Below is the handout I wanted to give out in class to facilitate our discussion of the final three acts. Look over this and we'll discuss these ideas next week. Might help you with the upcoming Second Paper assignment! 

 I. COMEDY AS SOCIAL CONFUSION

From Susan Wills, The BBC Shakespeare Plays

1.) “You can do anything in the right place at the right time. If you do the right thing at the wrong time you look silly and the audience is pleased...Cellan-Jones [the director of the 1983 BBC Comedy of Errors] emphasized the public nature of the private actions: the beating of servants, the fetching of husbands home to lunch or to be exorcised of demons, the arrests happen in the street, for comedy depends on the public setting.”

From Arthur F. Kinney, “The Comedy of Errors: A Modern Perspective” (pp.179-195)

2.) “If it were not so funny, Shakespeare’s first comedy would read like a schizophrenic nightmare: identities are lost, split, engulfed, halucinated, imploded. Apparently solid citizens (solid at least to themselves) suffer ‘ontological uncertainty’ in acute forms. wandering about unrecognized by all they encounter” (182). 

II. COMEDY AS A MIRROR OF SOCIETY

1.) “...the gold chain that is disputed in The Comedy of Errors was just the sort of acquisition that Londoners themselves focused on; both identity and status depended increasingly on one’s material goods. Because the society was more and more cognizant that what one was was largely determined by what one owned, the chief emphasis in The Comedy of Errors on possessions, on being possessed (by marriage, witchcraft, or grace) and on being dispossessed unites the play’s Ephesus with Shakespeare’s London” (184-185).

From Act 3, Scene 2: Dromio discusses his “wife” to his master, Antipholus of Syracuse, pages 77-81

2.) DROMIO: Marry, sir, she’s the kitchen wench, and all grease, and I know not what use to put her to but to make a lamp of her and run from her by her own light. I warrant her rags and the tallow in them will burn a Poland winter. If she lies till doomsday, she’ll burn a week longer than the whole world” (77).

* QUESTION TO CONSIDER: In a modern production, these can still be very funny lines, as he’s horrified by his fat, dirty, oily, horrific wife (really, the other Dromio’s wife). But isn’t this also a bit misogynistic? He’s making of a woman by equating her to “the globe,” and relating different parts of her body to the stereotypes of different countries/people. What does this say about the attitudes of Shakespeare’s time, and their view of women as possessions which were either valued or devalued?

Blog Response #2 for The Comedy of Errors, Acts 3-5

Watch the video below after (or before) you finish reading The Comedy of Errors, and respond with a comment below. We might not be able to discuss the play next week, since snow might have other ideas; if so, I'll post something for you to do or think about on the blog (not another video--don't worry!). 

Recap of Tuesday's class: The Comedy of Errors, Acts 1-2

 

COMEDY BEGINS WITH TRAGEDY...

• Bevis, Page 50: The essence of humor is surprise: how does scene 1 set up this sense of surprise?
• Page 15: Also tension: Egeon has a day to raise the money, and his son is also out there looking…
• Page 19: Pathos—Antipholus' speech: to find them, I lose myself (the theme of identity!)

AND THEN TRAGEDY BECOMES FUNNY...

• One of the oldest comic plots: mistaken identities! Two pairs of twins (Antipholus and Dromio of Syracuse and Ephesus); imagine how many comic misunderstandings can ensue from the 'wrong' twin being in the 'right' place
• Page 19: The play takes an abrupt turn from tragedy to comedy the second the 'wrong' Dromio appears; that's the surprise that shocks the audience--and Shakespear never looks back
• Page 21-23: Dromios puns--most of the verbal humor of the servants are based in puns, since these were roles by the comedians in his theater; the audience loved to hear quick wit and verbal shenanigans (even though it's a little tiresome to us)
• Page 33: A funny moment using PROSE: note how Dromio tells the story of his encounter with Antipholus. It's not at all accurate and he makes his master sound foolish and insane. Is this how servants view their masters?

 THE COMEDY OF LANGUAGE 

• Note the THREE types of language: Blank Verse (non-rhyming verse); Rhyming Verse; and Prose. Characters switch from one to another without warning. Always ask yourself "why did they change?" The answer will help you understand the characters and/or how Shakespeare wants them played by the actors. 
• Page 29: The sisters almost always speak to each other in rhymes, but not at first...when do they switch and why?
• They start rhyming when they start bickering: it's a verbal tennis match, back and forth, each one trying to outdo the other. 
• Page 39: Note that Dromio speaks prose to Antipholus, and he soon answers in prose. He said before that Dromio is taking advantage of their friendly relationship. Maybe this shows their true intimacy, that he'll let his guard down and speak 'normally' to him? 
• Page 45-47: When Adriana addresses Antipholus for the first time, it's in Blank Verse! Why? Note her echoes of Antipholus, page 19 (similar metaphors
• BLANK VERSE is serious or formal--usually means we're being told something important, or the characters are being eloquent (as in Adriana's speeches). RHYMING VERSE is more playful and musical--not as important, but more about the sound and the way the characters 'sing' together. PROSE is never important, meaning it's almost never part of the plot...just jokes, puns, and nonsense.

For Next Week: The Comedy of Errors, Acts 1-2

REMEMBER: Take your time reading and break down large speeches into sentences, and look for the linguistic elements that make a character/speech come alive: rhyme, metaphor, puns, etc. What would this speech sound like read out loud (you can ever try it!). Why are people as much how they speak as what they say? 

Also, remember that much of the humor in this play comes from elaborate puns on a single word, and mistaken identities. See Q3 below, which ties this into Bevis' book (it goes VERY well with this play). You might not find it hilarious when reading, but imagine how this would look...and why is it funny when someone is mistaken for someone else? You might consider how often this happens in modern comedy.

Answer TWO of the following:

Q1: The Comedy of Errors opens more like a tragedy than a comedy: Egeon is given a death sentence, and tells a long and tragic story about how he lost his family. Why would Shakespeare open a play like this? How does this 'introduce' the comedy and silliness to follow? Why might it be an effective or even necessary opening for this play?

Q2: Usually, Shakespeare's characters speak blank verse, which is unrhymed iambic pentameter. But note that the women in the play, Adriana and Luciana, often rhyme with each other (see Act 2.1 especially). Why is this? How might this contrast with the language of the men in the play? 

Q3: In Chapter 3 of Bevis' Comedy: A Very Short Introduction, he writes, "we are most alive when indulging in a fantasy of ourselves" (43). How does this relate to the comic business of Act 2, where Antipholus is literally mistaken for a twin he's never met? Also, why does he so quickly decide to go along with it, merely because his wife insists that he is him? What might this say about the nature of our identity and other people's ability to choose it?

Q4: In Act 2, Scene 2, Shakespeare does something very subtle with the characters' language which underlines the comedy of the scene. It begins on the bottom of page 49 (Act 2, scene 2, around line 180) and continues all the way to the end of the scene. How do the character begin using language differently in a way that even the audience could hear? Why does Shakespeare do this? Why might how the characters speak underline who they are--or how they feel? 

Handout on Shakespeare's Language from Tuesday's class

NOTE: This is the handout we discussed in class, which might be useful for your first foray into reading Shakespeare this week. Be sure to read Acts 1-2 of The Comedy of Errors, with questions to follow (above). 

From Act One, Scene One of The Comedy of Errors

 

DUKE

Merchant of Syracusa, plead no more.

I am not partial to infringe our laws.

 

The enmity and discord which of late

Sprung from the rancorous outrage of your duke

To merchants, our well-dealing countrymen,

Who, wanting guilders to redeem their lives,

Have sealed his rigorous statutes with their bloods,

Excludes all pity from our threat’ning looks.

 

For since the mortal and intestine jars

‘Twixt thy seditious countrymen and us,

It hath in solemn synods been decreed,

Both by the Syracusians and ourselves,

To admit no traffic to our adverse towns.

 

Nay, more, if any born at Ephesus

Be seen at Syracusan marts and fairs;

Again, if any Syracusan born

Come to the bay of Ephesus, he dies,

His good confiscated to the Duke’s dispose,

Unless a thousand marks be levied

To quit the penalty and to ransom him.

 

Thy substance, valued at the highest rate,

Cannot amount unto a hundred marks;

Therefore by law thou art condemned to die.

 

 TRICKS TO READING LONG SPEECHES:

• Break into individual sentences
• Examine strange syntax (and translate) ; look up any obsolete or strange words
• Look for rhymes, alliteration, assonance, etc.
• Examine the metaphors in each passage; how do the metaphors help characterize the speaker or their speech?

EX: “I am not partial to infringe our laws.” = “I’m not the kind of man to go against the law.” Why would a Duke speak one way and not the other? What’s his point? Why would Shakespeare have a Duke speak so imposingly, without rhymes, to someone convicted of a crime?

Remember, the actors in Shakespeare's time were on a relatively small stage, without elaborate props or costumes. Only their language 'clothed' them or made other people see them as more than the were--a low-class actor. So Shakespeare uses language to create rank and class, varying the style (prose vs. verse), the syntax (straightforward speech vs. poetic syntax) and linguistic devices (puns, metaphors, rhymes, alliteration, etc). He characterizes the Duke by how he speaks and what he says. He wants to frighten and intimidate Egeon; therefore, he speaks in imposing, convoluted speech which sounds legalistic, archaic, and powerful. Read it out loud--the Duke sounds great, even though he's only basically saying this: "since your duke imprisoned and murdered some of our merchants, we've vowed war against him, and this war has become a law between us. So if someone from your country lands here, we kill them, unless they can pay a thousand mark fine. Since you obviously can't, we're just going to kill you outright." 

From Act 1, Scene 2

 

ANTIPHOLUS OF SYRACUSE

Now, as I am a Christian, answer me

In what safe place you have bestowed my money,

Or I shall break that merry sconce of yours

That stands on tricks when I am undisposed.

Where is the thousand marks thou hadst of me?

 

DROMIO OF EPHESUS

I have some marks of yours upon my pate,

Some of my mistress’ marks upon my shoulders,

But not a thousand marks between you both.

If I should pay your Worship those again,

Perchance you will not bear them patiently.

 

PUNS: The different meanings of “marks”: money and scars. Also, the different meanings of “paying out”—to give money, to get revenge. Much of the comedy of Shakespeare's early plays comes from elaborate verbal puns that twists the meaning of a word as far as it can go. He particularly loves to take a word and give it a sexual connotation. 

 

 

From Act 2, Scene 2

 

ANTIPHOLUS OF SYRACUSE

If you will jest with me, know my aspect,

And fashion your demeanor to my looks,

Or I will beat this method in your sconce.

 

DROMIO OF SYRACUSE “Sconce” call you it? SO you would leave battering, I had rather have it a “head.” An you use these blows long, I must get a sconce for my head and ensconce it too, or else I shall seek my wit in my shoulders. But I pray, sir, why am I beaten?

 

ANTIPHOLUS OF SYRACUSE Dost thou not know?

 

DROMIO OF SYRACUSE Nothing, sir, but I am

Beaten.

 

ANTIPHOLUS OF SYRACUSE Shall I tell you why?

 

DROMIO OF SYRACUSE Ay, sir, and wherefore, for they say ever why hath a wherefore…Was there ever any man thus beaten out of season, when in the “why” and the “wherefore” is neither rhyme nor reason?

 

NOTE: When does poetry become prose? When do they stop talking in iambic pentameter? Clues? And how do you read prose differently? Should the audience know?

VERSE takes up less space on the page since it's following a specific rhythm/structure. Shakespeare uses iambic pentameter, which is a ten-syllable line without rhymes. Typically, educated people, the upper-classes, kings, etc. speak in verse. Antipholus does, and the 'other' Dromio does, but in this scene, his servant, Dromio of Syracuse, speaks in PROSE. Prose is just normal speech, without rhythm or structure. It sounds different when spoken and has the effect of capturing 'real' speech, especially of the lower classes. Much of his plays constrasts the two languages, and he can create character and drama (and comedy!) by doing so.

Tuesday's Class Recap and Reminders for Next Week

 REMEMBER, no reading or work for next week! Instead, we're going to discuss how to read Shakespeare (his language, that is) in Tuesday's class. I'll give you a handout in class which will help you tackle The Comedy of Errors the following week, as well as give you some insight into Shakespeare's unique brand of poetry and syntax. If you want to get a jump on the play, you certainly can, but it's not required. You should think about writing your Paper #1 though! 

Below are some of the highlights of Chapters 3-4 and some of what we did in class:

We watched the scene above from Groundhog Day which was also referenced in Chapter 4 of Bevis' Comedy: A Very Short Introduction.

• Caricature becomes character: when does the joke stop being funny to us—and to her?
• SURPRISE: Page 50...The essence of humor is surprise—how is this scene surprising?
• ROUTINE: Page 49...makes surprise possible; everything is so ordinary, but what makes it extraordinary? Isn’t it normal because WE see it over and over?
• METAPHOR: As Bevis writes, You live and learn and then you die…but what if you don’t? This is certainly true of the movie! So why is it funny to replay the same day over and over and think you're trapped, as we all do? Isn't the joke on us? 
• THE JOKE: Repeating every day is what we ALL do; if we paid more attention, we would also know everyone’s stories (and maybe, our own!)
• Page 60: “Yeah, that about sums it up for me”

 ROMANTIC COMEDY

• Page 52: FALLING IN LOVE: To fall in love is to have lost the plot: even though he knows everything (the plot), he still wants to know her better; he forgets that he’s stuck when he’s around her—she is still unknowable
• WHY ROMANTIC COMEDY IS SUCH A GENRE: LOVE MAKES THE MUNDANE INTERESTING AND THE ORDINARY EXTRAORDINARY. IT MAKES US FORGET THE ‘PLOT’—OUR NORMAL LIVES, OUR JOBS, OUR RESPONSIBILITIES.

CHARACTER AND IDENTITY

• The idea of “character”: not something you are, but something you play (38): Your moral character, you’re such a character, etc.
• The disparity between what a person is and what he affects to be (39)
• CARICATURE: Page 40: you can reveal the truth by stretching it! Over the top, hyperbole, caricature, satire
• PEOPLE ARE FICTIONS: we fall into the scripts that other people write for us (45)
• 47: Important point—there’s nobody, it seems, that we resemble less than ourselves, yet we are never more ourselves than when we are reminded of the fact. How does comedy help us appreciate this 'fact'?