Final Project: due no later than December 6th!

English 3213: Shakespeare

Final Project: Ten-Minute Shakespeare

For your ‘final exam’ so to speak, I want you to take a cue from The Reduced Shakespeare Company, and prepare a ten-minute version of one of the plays from class. While this is a humorous idea, it also tests how well you know a given play, and what the essence of the play’s themes and characters truly consist of. What would a ten-minute Othello or Twelfth Night look like? How could you compress most of the general theme, plot, and language into a single short scene?

Your final project should consist of two parts:

·       A 5-7 page script (since 1 page = 2 minutes of reading time) composed solely from the lines of the play you choose. Don’t add any lines, but pick and choose what parts of the play you want to present so we can see the skeleton of the story & a few of its characters.

·       A short Epilogue (1-2 pages), where you explain what you hoped to achieve in this drastic reduction of the play. Why did you make the choices you made, and what ‘story’ does this version tell, since you had to leave so much of it out?

Remember, you’re going to have to take a LOT of the play out. You can’t preserve every character, plot, and incident. But you can show us some aspect of the play that will give us a taste of the actual thing. You don’t have to use an entire speech, or an entire conversation, but edit it as you see fit. For example, you could focus solely on the journey of a single character, or a single theme, or a single relationship. Or you can give several little snapshots. But try to make it coherent, and include stage directions (the original or your own) so we see how the different moments go together.

Have FUN with it. You can make a tragedy seem more like a comedy, or vice versa. I will only grade this by how well we can still see some aspect of the story in your version, as well as how some of the great lines are preserved. I’ll also look at how thoughtful you are in your Epilogue and what kind of method went into your madness.

DUE NO LATER THAN WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 6^th BY 5PM

Class This Week: No More Reading! But Class Continues...

 I forgot remind everyone to come back to class on Wednesday, even though there's no scheduled reading. We finished the plays, so now we're going to look ahead to our final activity. Should be interesting... :) 

I'm in the process of grading everyone's Paper #2. They should all be returned to you by Friday at the latest, though some of you will get them earlier. Remember that you can revise any paper in class for a higher grade if you wish. 

Let me know if you have any questions. See you on Wednesday (tomorrow)! 

For Monday/Wednesday: Antony and Cleopatra, Acts 2-3 (see Note)

NOTE: I'm going to push the paper back to next Monday, so we can actually finish the play this week. That way, you'll also have the weekend to write the paper. So here are questions for Acts 2 & 3, and you can turn them in as late as Wednesday. You only have to read Act 2 for Monday (since that's probably all we'll have time to discuss, anyway). We will do an in-class response over Act 3 on Wednesday as well, but I thought it would be easier to give you more time on the questions. 

Answer TWO or ONE, depending on your time, interest, and inclination: 

Q1: How would you stage Act 2, Scene 5, particularly the scenes with Cleopatra and the Messenger? Is this a scene of high comedy, where Cleopatra loses it and acts like a spoiled child? Or is this a deeply tragic scene, where she realizes that the one hold she had over Antony’s affections is lost? Use a line or two to support how you think we’re supposed to read (and stage) this scene.

Q2: When Enobarbus tells the Romans (Maecenas and Agrippa) about Cleopatra, he switches from verse to prose: why does he do this? Also, examine this speech—what does he think about Cleopatra? Does he consider her Antony’s “exotic” whore? Or does he hold her in respect and awe? 

Q3: Though Rome is notoriously racist in its views towards Cleopatra and Egypt, is the same true of Antony? Does he love her in spite of her race, or is he ‘color blind’ when it comes to his affections? How does Act III offer us a definitive portrait of their relationship, especially once the chips are down (after the disastrous naval battle)?

Q4: What role does Enobarbus seem to embody in the play, particularly in Acts 2 and 3? Though he is one of Antony’s most loyal supporters, even he is looking for a way out by the end of Act 3. Is he another Shakespearean Fool? Or is he more like Iago, plotting secretly against Antony?

For Friday: Antony and Cleopatra, Act 1

Answer TWO of the following as usual, or go to town with ONE if you really have a good idea: 

Q1: In many ways, this is a play about acting, and no one acts more extravagantly as Cleopatra. As Enobarbarus (her servant) says about her, "I have seen her die twenty times upon poor moment" (1.2). Why does she spend so much of her time with Antony in 'costume' rather than being more 'real'? Does he, like Othello, not appreciate a Sonnet 130 woman? Conversely, why might a woman like Cleopatra view life as a performance? 

Q2: How do the Romans in the play, such as Caesar, regard Antony's behavior? Though he's a great warrior and clearly a great lover (to win Cleopatra's affections), what makes him seem 'unmanly' to them? Do people in Egypt share the same opinion? Does he? 

Q3: After seeing the great love that Othello and Desdemona had for each other (at least in Acts 1-2), is the same true for Cleopatra and Antony? Are they madly, passionately in love, or is it more a power play? Is he using her for political advantage? Is she? How does their language in Act 1 betray their emotions? 

Q4: How does Shakespeare create the 'setting' of Egypt through his language? In other words, how does he give his audience a sense of Egyptian atmosphere through the way the Egyptians speak and act? In Shakespere's day, they wouldn't have much in the way of sets or props, so the language, alone, would make people believe they were in a different country. What makes Egypt 'sound' differently than Rome or Romans? How does he create this illusion (Act 1.2 is a good example). 

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!

For Monday: Twelfth Night, Acts 4-5

Last questions for Twelfth Night! Try to finish the play for Monday's class, though we'll talk about it a bit more on Wednesday. The course calendar says we're going to have an in-class Mid-Term on Wednesday, but I'm moving that back to Friday for reasons I'll explain on Wednesday. But don't worry, it's not a typical Mid-Term and I'll explain what it's all about during Wednesday's class.

Answer TWO of the following: 

Q1: At the end of Act 4, Scene 1, Olivia, mistaking Sebastian for Cesario, tells him, "O, say so, and so be!" Why might this be the motto of the entire Act (if not the play)? How do characters change identities and fortunes merely by the act of speech? Discuss how someone in this act uses language to change themselves or are changed by someone else's language. Are we really constructions of our and other's language?

Q2: In her article, “Twelfth Night: A Modern Perspective,” Catherine Belsey reminds us that Viola is named (as Viola) only once in the play, and only then in Act 5. She goes on to mention that she “has no fixed location in the play. Even when she speaks “in her own person”—and it is not easy to be sure when that is—the play does not always make clear where we are to “find” her identity “ (203). Why do you think Shakespeare makes Viola so transparent in the play and so difficult to pin down? How does that affect the idea of both Olivia and Orsino falling in love with her?

Q3: How does Malvolio change in Act Five? While he’s still very much the same character, what about his language and his words undergoes an interesting transition? How do we—and Olivia—read him differently in the final act? (or, how does Shakespeare suggest we do?)

Q4: Interestingly, in a play about love, none of the men seem remotely in love with the women in question: Sebastian has no reason to love Olivia (he doesn’t even know her!), and Orsino never quite convinces us that he loves Olivia, either. The men are much more convincing when espousing their love for other men: Orsino for Cesario, and Antonio for Sebastian. Why do you think this is? Why can men speak of love more convincingly among each other than to the opposite sex?

For Friday: Twelfth Night, Act Three (no questions)

Remember, we're doing an in-class response over Act Three of Twelfth Night for Friday's class. Here are a few ideas we might discuss...

* Why does Viola insist on speaking verse with Olivia if she doesn't want to lead her on (as she claims)? She speaks prose with the Fool and Sir Toby, so why not continue to speak prose with her?

* Is Olivia falling in love with him, or just toying with him, to see if she can win him over like Orsino? Is his chief attraction that he doesn't seem to like her (the very reason Orsino seems to like her)?

* What does Viola mean when she says to Olivia, "you do think you are not what you are"? Why does she think the same of him? Does she guess his true identity?

* Why do Toby and Fabian want to start a fight between Andrew and Viola? What are they hoping will result from this duel?

* Is Antonio's love for Sebastian still just a deep friendship? Are there any hints in his language (ala the Sonnets) that he strives for something more?

* Why does Malvolio woo his mistress with prose? You would think his love would make him 'usurp himself' into verse, to show that he's her equal? Instead, he acts like a fool in comic prose. Also--what does he say to her which might shock Shakespeare's audience?

For Wednesday: Twelfth Night, Act Two

Keep reading the play, and feel free to read past Act 2, but we'll only have time to discuss Act 2 for Wednesday's class. We won't have questions for Friday, but will have an in-class response for Act 3, so enjoy these questions! :) 

Answer TWO (or One, in an extended response): 

Q1: Carefully examine Viola’s speech in Act 2, Scene 2, which begins “Fortune forbid my outside have not charmed her!” This is a soliloquy, which means she is speaking to the audience alone; what does she reveal of her innermost thoughts? Is she proud to have conquered Olivia’s affections as a “man”? Does she blame Olivia for her conquest? Or Orsino?

Q2: In Act 2, Scene 4, Orsino and Viola have a debate on who loves deeper: a man or woman. Part of the humor of this scene is that Orsino is telling a woman how women feel, and why they can’t possibly measure up to his own (male) affections. How does Viola respond to his claims, and where might she borrow some ideas from The Sonnets along the way?

Q3: Act 2.5 is one of the funniest scenes in all of Shakespeare, and barely contains a drop of verse from beginning to end. What makes this such a universal scene, and one that stages particularly well for a modern audience? (also, how does Shakespeare take pains to make the language relatively easy to follow)?

Q4: In a play full of "fools," what role does the Fool seem to play in this comedy? While Sir Toby and Sir Andrew are largely confined to one locale, the Fool seems to move freely throughout the play, talking with virtually everyone. Why might a 'fool' i Shakespeare not be exactly what we make a fool to be in the modern sense (or what someone like Sir Andrew is, for example)? 

For Monday: Twelfth Night, Act 1

If you missed class on Friday, we watched Act 1 from a modern version (2018) of Twelfth Night, which had modern dress and locations, though of course it preserved Shakespeare's language. If you want to see a modern authentic version, here's a link to the Globe production of 2013, with Elizabethan dress and performance standards: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pnnmKxICYvM

Read Act 1 for Monday and answer two of the following questions (or 1, in more sufficient detail):

Q1: As Shakespeare goes on in his career, he starts to use prose much more often, especially in his comedies. Who speaks prose in Twelfth Night and why might this be? What does prose allow him to say/express with certain characters and their language?

Q2: Twelfth Night is also the first play in this class where we meet a distinct Shakespearean character (of which Bottom and Puck are distantly related), the Fool. In this play, the Fool (sometimes called Feste) has a very unique relationship with the woman he serves, Olivia. What does this relationship seem to be? Is he her servant? And if so, why does he insult her? Does she like him, or just tolerate him? 

Q3: We hear many echoes of The Sonnets in Act 1, most notably when Orsino tells the cross-dressing Viola that "They say thou art a man. Diana's lip/Is not more smooth and rubious, thy small pipe/Is as the maiden's organ" (25). Where else did you hear these echoes and how might knowing the Sonnets behind them change how we read the scene? 

Q4: Read the exchange between Viola and Olivia in 1.5 carefully. Where and why does their language change? We know that Olivia is smitten with Viola, but is this attraction mutual? How should we stage this interaction based on the language and what they say to one another? 

For Wednesday: A Midsummer Night's Dream, Act 5

Read the final act of A Midsummer Night's Dream for Wednesday's class and answer a few more questions...

Q1: The Pyramus and Thisbe play is Shakespeare's cheeky lampoon of the worst theater of his day, performed by some of his most insensible actors. According to this Act, what are some of the hallmarks of bad writing and acting that Shakespeare is exposing to his audience? How does Shakespeare also use his on-stage audience as a kind of 'applause' sign? 

Q2: Shakespeare loves being 'meta,' which means little devices that break down the 'fourth wall' of the stage and suggest the obvious--that the play IS a play, and the actors ARE actors. What are some ways Shakespeare accomplishes this in Act 5, which is the most 'meta' act of all? 

Q3: Though clearly a bathetic tragedy (meaning, one that falls short of being truly pathetic, or touching), how might the Pyramus and Thisbe play be itself an echo (or double) of A Midsummer Night's Dream itself? When does the language, or the characters, or even the plot seem to suggest events that we've seen in the previous play, where the audience were the actors?

Q4: Even stranger than the play, is the role of Puck at the end, who is basically playing the role of Bottom, telling the audience (in this case, us) that "none of this was real, it was all pretend, just a dream, so don't be offended!" Why would Shakespeare do this, when he earlier made fun of Bottom for doing so? Is Puck's apology itself an act of meta-satire? Or is it a sincere apology for going too far? 

For Monday: A Midsummer Night's Dream, Acts 3-4

Answer TWO (or ONE, in greater detail) of the following: 

Q1: For one of the first times in the play, Helena speaks a long monologue in blank verse in 3.2. What makes this speech so significant in the play? Also consider who the speech is made to, and why this might account for her change in language. 

Q2: After humiliating Titania (and taking the Indian child), Oberon magnanimously declares, "Now thou and I are new in amity,/And will tomorrow midnight solemnly/Dance in Duke Theseus' house triumphantly" (4.1). How does she respond to be drugged and tricked? Has she been 'tamed' by him? Or does she realize it was a good trick and simply shrug it off? How do you account for her very brief response in Act 4, as well as the language she speaks? 

Q3: What do you make of Demetrius' claim in Act 4 that:

But like a sickness I did loathe this food.

But, as in health, come to my natural taste,

Now I do wish it, love it, long for it,

And will forevermore be true to it. (4.1)

Is his love for Helena his "natural taste"? Isn't he the only one who isn't restored to his senses? So did Puck have to drug him to force a happy ending? Or have any of them been restored to their "natural taste"? 

Q4: At the end of Act 3, Puck famously declares, 

Jack shall have Jill;

Naught shall go ill,

The man shall have his mare again, and all shall be 

well. (3.2). 

A comedy by definition ends in one or more marriages, so Shakespeare had to conclude this play with the triple marriages of the royal couple, as well as Lysander/Hermia & Demetrius/Helena. But what is being celebrated here? Is Shakespeare, like Puck, merely making fun of the audience's need for happy--if forced--endings? Is he making square pegs fit round holes? Or does he share the misogynistic tastes of his audiences, which wanted to see women tamed and men the masters of their domains? Is Shakespeare ultimately on Theseus & Oberon's side? 

For Friday: A Midsummer NIght's Dream, Act Two

NOTE: No questions this time, but we'll do an in-class writing over some aspect of Act 2 (maybe someone's speech??) when you get to class. Here are some ideas to consider:

* Look at the language of this act: who speaks in verse? Rhymed verse? Blank verse? Prose? Who switches from one to the other?

* How do Titania and Oberon contrast with the other pairs of lovers we've seen so far in the play? Who are they most like? Theseus and Hippolyta? Hermia and Lysander? Helena and Demetrius?

* Why does Oberon demand the little Indian boy from Titania, especially when she clearly has a bond with the child that he does not? How might this echo other aspects of the play from Act 1?

* Why does Shakespeare include songs in his play, especially since most of the poetry in the play is already quite musical? How do we 'read' songs as a reader differently than they would appear on-stage? 

* Is it comic that Lysander exchanges his love for Hermia with Helena so readily? Should a mere drop from a magic flower untie the bonds of love? Is this merely a plot device of comedy, or is Shakespeare's cynicism about love (from the Sonnets) showing through?

For Wednesday: A Midsummer Night's Dream, Act One

Answer TWO of the following, or ONE in much greater detail:

Q1: In Chapter 3 of Love: A Very Short Introduction, de Sousa writes, “Many people are convinced that their love, like their belief that two and two is four, is both inescapable and grounded in reasons—even if the reasons cannot be articulated. If desire and belief are alike in this respect, perhaps the explanation is also the same for both” (47). How do we see this quote/idea illustrated in Act One? Who loves for reasons and whose love defies reason? Who is told to love for reasons? Do these reasons make sense to them (or the audience)?

Q2: Examine one of the longer speeches as if it was one of the Sonnets. If we extract this speech from the play and read it like a poem, what does it tell us? How does it play with some of the themes we encountered in the Sonnets, and how do the metaphors help us ‘see’ into the mind of the speaker?

Q3: In The Sonnets Shakespeare delighted in using theatrical metaphors to explore his experience of love. In his plays, Shakespeare loves to mock theatrical conventions and pretensions, particularly among people who don’t really know how they work. How can we read Act One, Scene 2 as a lampoon of theater in Shakespeare’s day? What ‘sins’ does he seem to accuse many actors and playwrights of committing? What makes this scene still read as humorous today, even though we have very different theatrical conventions?

Q4: Discuss some element of the filmed version of Act One that changed the play or helped you see some new aspect of it not in the text. What interpretive decisions did they make (setting, characters, costumes, etc.) that either aided or detracted from the play in your opinion? You might also consider why a production of Shakespeare always has to change something from the original text.

For Friday: de Sousa, Chapter 3, "Desire"

We're taking a break on The Sonnets for a few weeks and transitioning into the first of the four plays we'll read in this class (for next week). However, first I want to dive back into de Sousa for some context that might help us see some interesting aspects of A Midsummer Night's Dream. 

Answer any TWO questions, or ONE in greater detail: 

Q1: de Sousa quotes the comedian Groucho Marx who said, "I would never join any club that would have me as a member." How does this sentiment pervade many of Shakespeare's Sonnets? A specific one? 

Q2: How does the concept of "reward" help perpetuate the cycle of desire and pleasure? If you got rewarded at the end of a pursuit, why would the cycle repeat just as strong as before? Would reward necessarily end the cycle?

Q3: What is the "altruist's dilemma," and how does it help explain why a "Court of Love" in 1176 ruled that love is incompatible in marriage? What does marriage--or any kind of formal union--abolish what is essential (they would argue) to the true condition of love and romance? Would Shakespeare agree with this? 

Q4: According to de Sousa, why is love like stepping on a nail? How are love and pain similar concepts? In other words, why are causes and reasons completely different concepts that we often conflate? Why according to de Sousa is love necessarily "reason-free"?

For Wednesday: The Sonnets, #62, 65, 66, 71, 72, 73, 80, 86, 87, 91

REMEMBER, no class on Monday (Labor Day)! Otherwise, read the next 10 Sonnets for Wednesday's class (feel free to read more, but focus mostly on these 10), which form the basis of the questions below. As usual, answer any TWO of ONE in greater detail. 

Q1: How do these 10 Sonnets effectively conclude the drama we've seen building up in the past few Sonnets? How does the relationship end? Is it amicable? Resentful? Does the poet excuse the lover and his mistress? Or does he go down swinging? 

Q2: In these later Sonnets, a fourth character seems to enter the scene, someone else to complicate the initial love triangle. Where do we see a fourth person (and a second rival for the young man's love)? Why might this rival be even more threatening than the Mistress?

Q3: This is a subjective question, but do you think the Sonnets get better as they go along? Obviously all are written at a very high level, but do they become more innovative, exciting, surprising, and interesting as they reach the 70's and 80's? If so, why might this be? What might this say about the nature of love and poetry?

Q4: As a playwright, Shakespeare not only draws from a stock of theatrical metaphors, but also adopts dramatic poses and rhetoric. Where might we see the poet adopting a theatrical 'mode' for greater effect? In other words, why might the poet be adopting a role or simply "acting out" to elicit a specific emotion from the young man? How do we know this poem might be a little out of place because of this attitude?  

Paper #1: Is This Love? due Sep.11th by 5pm

NOTE: The questions for Friday are in the post BELOW this one...

English 3213

Paper #1: Is This Love?

PROMPT: Using 3-4 Sonnets from the ones we’re reading in this unit of the class (1-94), make an argument for what kind of love and relationship the poet is exhibiting. Choose one of the following (or some variation of one of the following):

• A passionate, erotic relationship between two men which is consummated at some point (let us know the before and after)
• A passionate, idealistic relationship between two men which is not consummated, and the young man may or may not even know of the poet’s love (maybe the poems were intended to be private, like a diary?)
• A deeply committed friendship between two men who are not romantically involved but have a modern-day ‘bromance’ (maybe the poet is of a lower class, and couldn’t really hang out with him)
• A deeply committed paternal relationship on the part of the poet toward a younger man, whom he sees more like a beloved, if wayward, son (a playwright instructing a would-be actor?)
• OR, a fifth option, with some combination of the above (maybe one that turns into the other??)

In your paper, you should briefly trace how the relationship evolves, deepens, sours, and maybe even ends through these 3-4 Sonnets. You’re not trying to tell the entire story with these Sonnets, but just the basic outline. Summarize the story that you see and read in your paper, and then use a few close reading examples to bring it to life. Be sure to use Love: A Very Short Introduction as a source in this paper, quoting examples from the text to help you read/discuss the kind of love you encounter in the Sonnets.

CITATION: Be sure to cite lines from The Sonnets either by line or page number. You can also make poetry into single lines using the slash (/) for a line break as I did above. Introduce sources before you quote them (either de Sousa or the specific Sonnet you’re quoting) and include page numbers at the end. A Works Cited page should list all the sources you used in your paper.

REQUIREMENTS:

• At least 3-4 pages in length, but you can do more; be specific and try not to summarize too much.
• Close reading from specific Sonnets for support
• Use of de Sousa’s book for support—quote, don’t just summarize (it’s more persuasive)  
• DUE MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 11^th by 5pm!

For Friday: Sonnets #s 30-31, 33-35, 40-42, 46-47, 57-58

REMEMBER, no class on Wednesday (sadly) since I'll be out of town until the afternoon. I should be back by 1 or so if you have any questions or need any assistance. 

Read through the next batch of Sonnets, especially the following pairs: 

30-31

33-35

40-41

46-47

57-58

Then answer TWO of the following, or ONE in a longer response:

Q1: In many of the Sonnets, Shakespeare seems to elaborate on the same idea in pairs or throughout several Sonnets. Discuss how one of the pairs above seems to do this? What does he most develop: the situation? The metaphor? the approach? the tone/attitude? Be specific so we can see how they're related, and if possible, what one of them develops (is the second harsher than the first, or vice versa?)

Q2: How does the relationship seem to change throughout these Sonnets, especially in light of the previous ones? Is the relationship progressing, or standing still? Are there any new developments or new characters in the 'drama' of the Sonnets? Does the poet reveal himself in new ways in these Sonnets? Is a platonic love becoming erotic, or vice versa? Be sure to highlight a specific example.

Q3: Discuss a line or lines where Shakespeare either employs puns or words/phrases that have multiple meanings. How does Shakespeare exploit these words to create ambiguity or a complex meaning? Is he trying to be cautious in doing so, or is he being catty or derisive? 

Q4: Many of these poems are defined by their complaints: the poet seems to have a lot of grievances against the young man, and has trouble hiding his feelings. Reading between the lines, what does the young man seem to have done to the poet, or what 'crimes' has he committed? Do these threaten the relationship they have together, or is it more born out of jealousy or paranoia? 

For Monday: The Sonnets, #'s 15, 20, 22, 23, 25, & 29

A portrait of Shakespeare? We'll never know, just like we don't know if the Sonnets are his private letters, or a very public performance...

For Monday, read another handful of Sonnets, anywhere from 15-30, or the ones I've listed above: 15 (again, since it's a good one), 20, 22, 23, 25, & 29. Then answer TWO of the following questions for class:

Q1: Many of the early sonnets seem to express a philia, or sincere friendship between the poet and the young man (as in Sonnet 1). Do you detect a change in the Sonnets as they hit the 20's? What specifically seems to change, and where might we sense an element of eros? Do you think the poet addressing them to a different audience? Clues?

Q2: Shakespeare loves to make references to the stage and acting in his work, and especially in his Sonnets. Where do you see any allusions or metaphors to the world of the stage in these poems? A quick example: (Sonnet 15), "That this huge stage presenteth nought but shows." :) 

Q3: Reading between the lines of these poems, how does the poet reveal something about his personal life or concerns? What is his relationship to the young man (or whomever he's writing to)? Are they of the same age? Class? Profession? How can we tell?

Q4: Discuss something interesting, unique, or puzzling you find in one of the Sonnets. It could be strange syntax, beautiful sounds/rhymes, strange metaphors, or uncertain pronouns. What do you find strange/interesting about this, and how does it affect the poem itself? 

For Friday: Starting (Slowly) the Sonnets!

For Friday: Shakespeare. The Sonnets (1-18)

NOTE: I am only assigning the following Sonnets in the range of the first 18: 1, 3, 9, 12, 15, 18. You can read all of them if you like, but these are the only ones you need to read. And even as you read them, try to single out 2 or 3 to read more than once and to get inside a little bit more than the others.

NOTE ON SONNETS: A Shakespearean sonnet is in iambic pentameter, which means each line has 10 syllables (sometimes 11) that alternate with unstressed and stressed beats. It follows an ABABCDCDEFEFGG rhyme scheme every time. It ends in a Couplet, which are two rhymed lines which provide a little twist to the meaning of the poem. It often gives us a little jolt or surprise, and it can contradict other aspects of the Sonnet. We’ll discuss more on how to read Sonnets and Shakespeare’s poetry in Friday’s class.

Answer TWO of the following using any of the poems in this range:

Q1: Discuss a line that employs unusual syntax, meaning the arrangement of words in a poetic sentence. What do you think this line would translate to in ‘normal’ English? Why might he write it this way? In other words, why does he try to be more confusing than direct?

Q2: How does a specific poem (or a specific line or two) seem to underline some of the ideas discussed in de Sousa’s book about love, hierarchies of love, philosophies of love, etc.? Feel free to quote the passage in Love: A Very Short Introduction to illustrate this.

Q3: Choosing one specific sonnet, what makes it unusual to call this a “love sonnet”? What might it stretch the definition or experience of writing about love to a lover? Does this sonnet seem to be concerned with Eros love, or a different type of love? How can we tell?

Q4: Discuss a specific metaphor in one of the Sonnets that you find interesting, exciting, strange, or simply revealing. What is Shakespeare using the metaphor to explain, and what makes it such an interesting/unusual image? How might it reveal something about the nature and experience of love in Shakespeare’s time?

For Wednesday: de Sousa, Love, Chapter 2: "Perspectives"

Read Chapter 2, "Perspectives" from Love: A Very Short Introduction, but there are no questions this time. Instead, we'll do an in-class writing when you arrive in class on Wednesday (a simple one, so don't worry about reading too carefully--just try to get a general sense of the chapter). However, here are some ideas you might look out for as you read:

(don't answer these--just ideas to consider) 

* How is love a social construction, even though it is a universal and instinctual experience? How does society create--through our involvement--its own rules and taboos?

* In Chapter 2, de Sousa calls love a "pathology"...how does this relate to his earlier claims that it was also a "condition" and a "syndrome"? How does Shakespeare's Sonnet 147 play into this?

* Why do you think love is a way to excuse other reprehensible forms of behavior and manners (which in another context might lead to punishment)? Why does love get a pass when other types of behavior and conditions don’t? What might this say about our understanding of what love is, and what it has to do with logic and reason?

* If love is based on reason, why don't we fall in love with anyone who satisfies our reason? In other words, if you said that you were looking for X,Y, and Z in a person, would you fall in love instantly with everyone who satisfied these criteria? 

* Note how often de Sousa draws from classic literature to explore/explain love: Plato, Shakespeare, Freud, etc. Does this suggest that love is an example of life imitating art? Are we constantly trying to cosplay at art (to continue our discussion from Monday)? Is it all one giant imitation? And is this imitation an example of "sincere flattery"? Or is there something defeated and desperate in it? 

For Monday: de Sousa, Love: A Very Short Introduction, Chapter One

For Monday's class, either answer TWO of the following in short responses, or answer ONE in a much longer response (but it should be more developed and show me that you're really pursuing the question). 

Q1: de Sousa points out that the Greeks had several different words for several different kinds of love, whereas we only have one, 'love.' And yet, when we talk about love, we most often refer to eros, rather than agape, or philia, etc. Why do you think this is? Is this one more important than the others? Or just more important to our culture?

Q2: This chapter also makes the bold claim that "love is not an emotion" (3). He calls it instead a "syndrome" or a condition. Do you agree with this? Why might it actually be difficult to zero in on the emotion of love? 

Q3: One of the most interesting passages in this chapter (indeed, I included it on the syllabus) occurs on page 8: "If love reflects the unique characteristics of the individuals involved, we should expect a virtually infinite diversity of emotions of human loves. What is puzzling is that the exquisite uniqueness of both lover and beloved seems to manifest itself in a surprisingly restricted number of stock scenarios." Why do you think this is? Is it because of cultural taboos and biases? Or is love ultimately a very limited condition governed by a strict sense of chemical responses? 

Q4: In a seemingly humorous paradox, de Sousa writes that "The common dogma that love is purest when not contaminated by sex has an equally plausible converse: we can be sure that sexual desire is pure only when it remains uncontaminated by love" (16). This seems to go against everything we see in romantic comedies and love poems today, so what is he getting at? How can sex with love be "impure" or "contaminated"? 

Welcome to the Course!

Welcome to our journey into Shakespeare, and more specifically, into how Shakespeare's plays and poems can help us investigate the nature of love, both historically and in modern culture. Be sure to buy the books for the class as soon as possible, particularly one of our central texts, de Sousa's Love: A Very Short Introduction. The other works we'll be reading are The Sonnets, A Midsummer Night's Dream, Twelfth Night, Othello, and Antony and Cleopatra. 

I look forward to hearing your thoughts, impressions, misgivings, and epiphanies as we read through his works and consider the modern implications of the Elizabethan art of love (which, in many ways, we still subscribe to)!