“Now does he feel his title / Hang loose about him, like a giant’s robe / Upon a dwarfish thief.” (V.ii.20-22)
Clothing, a motif found in Macbeth, is depicted in this passage, spoken by Angusas, ill fitting in regards to Macbeth’s kingship. Here Macbeth is described as a “dwarfish thief” due to his murder of Donalbain. While Macbeth is not diminished in physical appearance he has become stunted in his role as King as a result of obtaining the crown by means of assassination of the previous King of Scotland. He wears the clothing of a giant but they do not fit him as his position of ruler does not fit him. The wrong clothing makes him seem less in his position of King. This passage alludes to the larger theme of kingship in the play, and Shakespeare’s question within the play of what makes a proper King. By displaying Macbeth in clothing which reduces him to a lower station his identity comes into question as does his classification. Macbeth’s best fitting clothing is that of armor which classifies him as a knight or warrior more so than King. It is through the use of onomastics that Macbeth’s designation as King, husband, father and/or knight comes under scrutiny from others in the play and the vehicle through which the theme of kingship comes into question.
Diana Athey
Wednesday, May 28, 2008
Thursday, May 15, 2008
fuwang Section Assignment
Claim:
Lady Macbeth is an integral part of the text. Without Lady Macbeth, there would be no "Macbeth"
Counter:
1) Macbeth was his own agent, he didn't need Lady Macbeth to push him.
2) It was in the Witches prophecy, therefore Lady Macbeth had no direct influence.
3) Lady Macbeth is not integral. She is a rather submissive character, especially by the end of the play.
-Alex Ball
-Marine Dermadzhyan
-Eliza Gerland
-Vanessa Gomez
-Maya Parmer
-Guido Pellegrini
Lady Macbeth is an integral part of the text. Without Lady Macbeth, there would be no "Macbeth"
Counter:
1) Macbeth was his own agent, he didn't need Lady Macbeth to push him.
2) It was in the Witches prophecy, therefore Lady Macbeth had no direct influence.
3) Lady Macbeth is not integral. She is a rather submissive character, especially by the end of the play.
-Alex Ball
-Marine Dermadzhyan
-Eliza Gerland
-Vanessa Gomez
-Maya Parmer
-Guido Pellegrini
Wednesday, May 7, 2008
othello
I'll have some proof. My name, that was as fresh as Dian's visage, is now begrimed and black."
The first quote is from act 3, scene 3, lines 402-403. This is Othello speaking to Iago. By this point, Iago has already become successful of making othello's mind run wild and convincing him of Desdemona's infidelity. Evidence provided in this quote that Iago has clearly manipulated othello's mind is when Othello himself says that HE will find evidence which will prove that his wife had done him wrong. Without having any evidence himself yet, only having Iago's words, Othello has already settled the issue. It also foreshadows that he will now be more prone to accuse Desdemona with any opportunity that erupts.
What I also found interesting is how his flesh, which he claim was fresh as Dian's Visage (chaste), is now black. Eventhough the color of his skin has always been the same, it has not changed, and has always been black, exposes a possible stereotype Othello holds toward black himself. Although he has always been black, he obviously did not view himself as so. This whole time, holding a high position in society, he has never considered himself as black. Of course he knew so, but the fact that he was able to surpass the biases held against him, he considered himself something else. He was able to rise above, and in that, his manner became nonblack. Now, angry because of Desdemona's alleged infidelity, he has come back to his "uncivilized" self. He has been done wrong and now he will do her wrong. This wrong that he plans to do, obviously a bad characteristic, makes him think about blackness. Othello, himself, associated lowliness with blackness.
-jessica munoz
The first quote is from act 3, scene 3, lines 402-403. This is Othello speaking to Iago. By this point, Iago has already become successful of making othello's mind run wild and convincing him of Desdemona's infidelity. Evidence provided in this quote that Iago has clearly manipulated othello's mind is when Othello himself says that HE will find evidence which will prove that his wife had done him wrong. Without having any evidence himself yet, only having Iago's words, Othello has already settled the issue. It also foreshadows that he will now be more prone to accuse Desdemona with any opportunity that erupts.
What I also found interesting is how his flesh, which he claim was fresh as Dian's Visage (chaste), is now black. Eventhough the color of his skin has always been the same, it has not changed, and has always been black, exposes a possible stereotype Othello holds toward black himself. Although he has always been black, he obviously did not view himself as so. This whole time, holding a high position in society, he has never considered himself as black. Of course he knew so, but the fact that he was able to surpass the biases held against him, he considered himself something else. He was able to rise above, and in that, his manner became nonblack. Now, angry because of Desdemona's alleged infidelity, he has come back to his "uncivilized" self. He has been done wrong and now he will do her wrong. This wrong that he plans to do, obviously a bad characteristic, makes him think about blackness. Othello, himself, associated lowliness with blackness.
-jessica munoz
Othello, 3.4.53-55
Othello: That’s a fault. That handkerchief /Did an Egyptian to my mother give/She was a charmer and could almost read/The thoughts of people. She told her, while she kept it/ ‘Twould make her amiable and subdue my father/Entirely to her love.
By scene 4 in Act 3, the characters in Othello have almost entirely succumbed to the chaos and darkness inherent in the morally-luminal Cyprus locale. Iago’s manipulations sank into the psyches of Cassio, Desdemona, and Othello respectively, causing everyone to question motivations, honesty, and reputation. The question of the origin of Othello’s handkerchief is important, as it addresses anxieties concerning “the other” and magical qualities. From the beginning of the play, Othello’s contemporaries describe him as a magician, a pirate/thief, capable of “tricking” Desdemona into loving him. In this passage, Shakespeare’s audience receives their first validation that perhaps Othello actually is (or was) involved in “old-world” trickery or magic. The catch here, however, lies in the fact that the handkerchief secures a man’s love for a woman. Othello as a play discusses the inability to reign in female sexuality – this motif is not validated by attempts by a female to control male sexuality. Othello gives Desdemona the handkerchief with the hope of controlling her, despite her honest and virginal disposition, and ironically ends up distrusting her faithfulness based on external male homosocial pressures. The handkerchief simply does not yield its intended purpose when Othello uses it – reiterating Shakespeare’s recurring discussion of women’s inherent unfaithfulness.
- Erin Pushkin
Waldo, Section 1D
By scene 4 in Act 3, the characters in Othello have almost entirely succumbed to the chaos and darkness inherent in the morally-luminal Cyprus locale. Iago’s manipulations sank into the psyches of Cassio, Desdemona, and Othello respectively, causing everyone to question motivations, honesty, and reputation. The question of the origin of Othello’s handkerchief is important, as it addresses anxieties concerning “the other” and magical qualities. From the beginning of the play, Othello’s contemporaries describe him as a magician, a pirate/thief, capable of “tricking” Desdemona into loving him. In this passage, Shakespeare’s audience receives their first validation that perhaps Othello actually is (or was) involved in “old-world” trickery or magic. The catch here, however, lies in the fact that the handkerchief secures a man’s love for a woman. Othello as a play discusses the inability to reign in female sexuality – this motif is not validated by attempts by a female to control male sexuality. Othello gives Desdemona the handkerchief with the hope of controlling her, despite her honest and virginal disposition, and ironically ends up distrusting her faithfulness based on external male homosocial pressures. The handkerchief simply does not yield its intended purpose when Othello uses it – reiterating Shakespeare’s recurring discussion of women’s inherent unfaithfulness.
- Erin Pushkin
Waldo, Section 1D
Iago's Soliloquy, 1.1 lines 40-47.
"I follow him to serve my turn upon him.
We cannot all be masters, nor all masters
Cannot be truly followed. You shall mark
Many a duteous and knee-crooking knave
That, doting on his own obsequious bondage,
Wears out his time, much like his master's ass,
For nought but provender, and when he's old, cashiered.
In this soliloquy, Iago uses the discourse of service to illustrate that, philosophically, he lays at the center of his own world. While there are people who are loyal and dutiful, they are only fools, and he wants his choices and actions to be of his own decision. Unlike his “master’s ass” who only work for food and clothing, in “obsequious bondage”, Iago’s service is for his own purposes and ends. Because this soliloquy occurs at the beginning of the play, it sets up the idea that through his self-centered philosophy, manipulative nature, and lack of loyalty, Iago is the mastermind behind the play’s action and the cause of the character’s future destruction.
Molly Foltyn
Waldo, 1H
We cannot all be masters, nor all masters
Cannot be truly followed. You shall mark
Many a duteous and knee-crooking knave
That, doting on his own obsequious bondage,
Wears out his time, much like his master's ass,
For nought but provender, and when he's old, cashiered.
In this soliloquy, Iago uses the discourse of service to illustrate that, philosophically, he lays at the center of his own world. While there are people who are loyal and dutiful, they are only fools, and he wants his choices and actions to be of his own decision. Unlike his “master’s ass” who only work for food and clothing, in “obsequious bondage”, Iago’s service is for his own purposes and ends. Because this soliloquy occurs at the beginning of the play, it sets up the idea that through his self-centered philosophy, manipulative nature, and lack of loyalty, Iago is the mastermind behind the play’s action and the cause of the character’s future destruction.
Molly Foltyn
Waldo, 1H
King Lear 1.1.120
Lear: Let it be so. Thy truth, then, be thy dower,
For by the sacred radiance of the sun,
The mysteries of Hecate and the night,
By all the operations of the orbs
From whom we do exist and cease to be,
Here I disclaim all my paternal care (1.1.120-125)
Lear’s condemnation of Cordelia characterizes the extreme offense to which he takes Cordelia’s truthful speech. Lear takes his words to a cosmic level, invoking the “sacred radiance of the sun” and “the operations of the orbs” to bear witness to his disowning of Cordelia. The allusion to Hecate, the goddess of witchcraft, furthers the gravity of Lear’s statements and suggests a sense of evil in Cordelia’s failure to promise Lear all her love. Lear also philosophizes existentially about “whom we do exist and cease to be,” implying Cordelia will ‘cease’ to be his daughter and he ‘cease’ to be her father. These observations foreshadow the changing of identities that will ensue throughout the play—Lear will cease to be a king, Lear will go mad, and both Cordelia and Lear will cease living.
The mention of Lear’s “paternal care” raises questions of the intimacy of Lear and Cordelia’s relationship. Lear’s relinquishment of his “care” appears to be simply the rescinding of his land offer and the dowry for her wedding. Though Goneril and Regan’s preceding speeches delight Lear for their promises of love and devotion, Lear’s only rewards to reciprocate these promises are monetary. Further, as Cordelia suggests, Regan and Goneril’s promises to Lear are unreasonable and also artificial, making the entire concept of Lear’s abdication an exercise in artificiality. Though Lear appears extremely angry with Cordelia for her defiance, Lear’s punishment does not reflect the father/daughter relationship but rather the king/subject relationship, as in lecture we discussed Lear’s treatment of his family as subjects. Lear’s elevation of his condemnation of Cordelia to cosmic and existential proportions further illustrates his awareness that Cordelia has publicly defied him and he must counter with a more resounding and seething conviction to exert his royal dominance before Kent and the other attendants.
-Tim Dawson, Section 1D
For by the sacred radiance of the sun,
The mysteries of Hecate and the night,
By all the operations of the orbs
From whom we do exist and cease to be,
Here I disclaim all my paternal care (1.1.120-125)
Lear’s condemnation of Cordelia characterizes the extreme offense to which he takes Cordelia’s truthful speech. Lear takes his words to a cosmic level, invoking the “sacred radiance of the sun” and “the operations of the orbs” to bear witness to his disowning of Cordelia. The allusion to Hecate, the goddess of witchcraft, furthers the gravity of Lear’s statements and suggests a sense of evil in Cordelia’s failure to promise Lear all her love. Lear also philosophizes existentially about “whom we do exist and cease to be,” implying Cordelia will ‘cease’ to be his daughter and he ‘cease’ to be her father. These observations foreshadow the changing of identities that will ensue throughout the play—Lear will cease to be a king, Lear will go mad, and both Cordelia and Lear will cease living.
The mention of Lear’s “paternal care” raises questions of the intimacy of Lear and Cordelia’s relationship. Lear’s relinquishment of his “care” appears to be simply the rescinding of his land offer and the dowry for her wedding. Though Goneril and Regan’s preceding speeches delight Lear for their promises of love and devotion, Lear’s only rewards to reciprocate these promises are monetary. Further, as Cordelia suggests, Regan and Goneril’s promises to Lear are unreasonable and also artificial, making the entire concept of Lear’s abdication an exercise in artificiality. Though Lear appears extremely angry with Cordelia for her defiance, Lear’s punishment does not reflect the father/daughter relationship but rather the king/subject relationship, as in lecture we discussed Lear’s treatment of his family as subjects. Lear’s elevation of his condemnation of Cordelia to cosmic and existential proportions further illustrates his awareness that Cordelia has publicly defied him and he must counter with a more resounding and seething conviction to exert his royal dominance before Kent and the other attendants.
-Tim Dawson, Section 1D
Tuesday, May 6, 2008
King Lear Act 3, Scene 4, lines 23-27
"Prithee, go in thyself; seek thine own ease.
This tempest will not give me leave to ponder
On things would hurt me more. But I'll go in.
[To the Fool] In boy; go in first.- You houseless poverty-
Nay, get thee in. I'll pray and then I'll sleep."
In this passage, Lear urges both Kent and the Fool to enter the hovel in order to escape the danger of the storm. He tells them that he will remain outside to pray for a while.
Discussion 1D
T.A.: Amanda Waldo
Measure for Measure Act I Scene IV
Lucio: Assay the power you have.
Isabella: My power? Alas, I doubt.
Lucio: Our doubts are traitors,
And makes us lose the good we oft might win,
By fearing to attempt. Go to Lord Angelo;
And let him learn to know, when maidens sue,
Men give like gods, but when they weep and kneel,
All their petitions are as freely theirs
As they themselves would owe them.
Isabella: I'll see what I can do.
In this passage from Measure for Measure, Lucio has gone to the convent to ask Isabella to plead for her brother Claudio's life. What proceeds is a conversation discussing the power of women in Shakespeare and probably of the contemporary society in general. The bulk of the passage comes from Lucio, attempting to convince Isabella over her power over men quite simply because she is a woman. She begins by saying she "doubts" she has any power over someone like Angelo, to which Lucio replies that "Our doubts are traitors,/And makes us lose the good we oft might win". This speech not only speaks to Isabella's potential power over Angelo but also can be viewed as a critique of her decision to become a nun. Isabella is often viewed as the model of purity in Measure for Measure; she makes it her duty to keep herself as far from temptation as possible. Here Lucio is questioning that logic by replying that if she always doubts her own power as a woman (both sexually and her own power to resist temptation) that no good will ever come of it.
The passage also paints a universal picture of men as a gender who cannot resist the pleas of a woman. Up to this point, Lord Angelo has been portrayed as cold, calculating and emotionless. Lucio portrays this lack of emotion as ignorance: "...let him learn to know, when maidens sue/Men give like Gods, but when they weep and kneel,/All their petitions are as freely theirs/As they themselves would owe them." Here is the passage where Lucio's belief in the power of women is truly revealed and confirmed throughout the rest of the play. While still recognizing that men still have the official "power" in society by characterizing the desires of woman as "As they themselves would owe them", he claims that if she but pleads to Lord Angelo that he like any other man will "give like Gods". Lucio seems to be juxtaposing both the supposed power of men in society and their weakness in regards to women at this point. By saying they have the power to "give like Gods" he reveals that men (especially those like Lord Angelo) have an abundance of wealth and power that is their alone to designate. He then follows that by saying that if a woman truly desires any of these things all she needs to do is "weep and kneel" and she can have as much as she wants. So while men may have the state-issued power that contemporary society reserved solely for them, they are helpless to defend against the "weaker" gender at any given time.
The passage from Claudio is also surrounded by two passages from Isabella which reveal her knowledge of such power but an aversion to recognizing and utilizing it. She first says she "doubts" she has such power, but as Lucio continues to speak it seems that she recognizes that what he says is true. Whereas before Lucio speaks she "doubts", after he speaks she replies "I'll see what I can do". Isabella has entered the convent in order to avoid the temptations of the world, but she is being asked to go converse with a man and use her femininity as a woman to persuade him. Lucio is also comparing the power men can give to that which she would receive in the convent. By saying men will "give like Gods" he is juxtaposing what she would receive through prayer in the convent and what men on the outside would give her if she only asked. Isabella ends the passage by stating: "I'll see what I can do" which seems to be her own recognition that the power Lucio is speaking of is something she is aware of and reluctantly willing to use to save her brother.
Richard Keeling
T.A. Fuson Wang
Isabella: My power? Alas, I doubt.
Lucio: Our doubts are traitors,
And makes us lose the good we oft might win,
By fearing to attempt. Go to Lord Angelo;
And let him learn to know, when maidens sue,
Men give like gods, but when they weep and kneel,
All their petitions are as freely theirs
As they themselves would owe them.
Isabella: I'll see what I can do.
In this passage from Measure for Measure, Lucio has gone to the convent to ask Isabella to plead for her brother Claudio's life. What proceeds is a conversation discussing the power of women in Shakespeare and probably of the contemporary society in general. The bulk of the passage comes from Lucio, attempting to convince Isabella over her power over men quite simply because she is a woman. She begins by saying she "doubts" she has any power over someone like Angelo, to which Lucio replies that "Our doubts are traitors,/And makes us lose the good we oft might win". This speech not only speaks to Isabella's potential power over Angelo but also can be viewed as a critique of her decision to become a nun. Isabella is often viewed as the model of purity in Measure for Measure; she makes it her duty to keep herself as far from temptation as possible. Here Lucio is questioning that logic by replying that if she always doubts her own power as a woman (both sexually and her own power to resist temptation) that no good will ever come of it.
The passage also paints a universal picture of men as a gender who cannot resist the pleas of a woman. Up to this point, Lord Angelo has been portrayed as cold, calculating and emotionless. Lucio portrays this lack of emotion as ignorance: "...let him learn to know, when maidens sue/Men give like Gods, but when they weep and kneel,/All their petitions are as freely theirs/As they themselves would owe them." Here is the passage where Lucio's belief in the power of women is truly revealed and confirmed throughout the rest of the play. While still recognizing that men still have the official "power" in society by characterizing the desires of woman as "As they themselves would owe them", he claims that if she but pleads to Lord Angelo that he like any other man will "give like Gods". Lucio seems to be juxtaposing both the supposed power of men in society and their weakness in regards to women at this point. By saying they have the power to "give like Gods" he reveals that men (especially those like Lord Angelo) have an abundance of wealth and power that is their alone to designate. He then follows that by saying that if a woman truly desires any of these things all she needs to do is "weep and kneel" and she can have as much as she wants. So while men may have the state-issued power that contemporary society reserved solely for them, they are helpless to defend against the "weaker" gender at any given time.
The passage from Claudio is also surrounded by two passages from Isabella which reveal her knowledge of such power but an aversion to recognizing and utilizing it. She first says she "doubts" she has such power, but as Lucio continues to speak it seems that she recognizes that what he says is true. Whereas before Lucio speaks she "doubts", after he speaks she replies "I'll see what I can do". Isabella has entered the convent in order to avoid the temptations of the world, but she is being asked to go converse with a man and use her femininity as a woman to persuade him. Lucio is also comparing the power men can give to that which she would receive in the convent. By saying men will "give like Gods" he is juxtaposing what she would receive through prayer in the convent and what men on the outside would give her if she only asked. Isabella ends the passage by stating: "I'll see what I can do" which seems to be her own recognition that the power Lucio is speaking of is something she is aware of and reluctantly willing to use to save her brother.
Richard Keeling
T.A. Fuson Wang
Monday, May 5, 2008
Angelo's soliloquy of Act 2.4.1-7 of "Measure for Measure."
Joey Henry
English 142b: Discussion 1H/ TA: Amanda Waldo
Monday, May 05, 2008
“When I would pray and think, I think and pray
To several subjects. Heaven hath my empty words,
Whilst my invention, hearing not my tongue,
Anchors on Isabel: Heaven in my mouth,
As if I did but only chew His name,
And in my heart the strong and swelling evil
Of my conception”
This quotation is an extraction from Angelo’s soliloquy from Act 2.4 1-7 of William Shakespeare’s play, “Measure for Measure.” Professor Cunningham, I believe, discussed this passage on the second day of lecture covering this play. Angelo’s language stresses the play’s thematic importance of the ineffectiveness of words. For example, Angelo says: “Heaven in my mouth, / As if I did but only chew His name,” and this quotation shows Angelo’s utter frustration of Isabella’s lack of words & vagueness of intent of her speech. Angelo and Isabella in 2.2, engage in a lengthy and tense conversation in regards to liberating Claudio from Angelo’s proposed death-sentence. Here, Angelo mentions God, or Heaven, (line 4) to articulate to a large extent the dichotomy between language & meaning. In particular, Angelo is referring specifically to his frustrating conversation between himself and Isabella two scenes prior. While this passage is admittedly a little difficult to decipher, I am assuming that Shakespeare with Angelo’s opening monologue in 2.4 wants to demonstrate the play’s power of language in terms of its ability to persuade or mislead particular characters.
Both of the male characters, Angelo & Lucio, conversing with Isabella in 2.2 acknowledge on different terms of how Isabella’s sexuality potentially can be exploited to persuade others. For example, Lucio occasionally interrupts the conversation of 2.2 & indirectly focuses on Isabella’s femininity to Angelo as a possible means of persuasion. Angelo, on the other hand, remains unclear about Isabella’s true intention behind her words, & subsequently brings up the possibility of sexual intercourse with her as an equal exchange for the liberation of her brother, Claudio. Both confused, Isabella & Angelo cannot negotiate a deal, & subsequently in 2.4.1-7, Angelo’s opening soliloquy, mentioning God with Heaven emptying his words, & Heaven in his mouth, expresses his utter confusion and frustration with Isabella’s speech.
King Lear I.2
Edmund’s true nature comes to light during the second half of his soliloquy on bastards. While his opening lines lament the nature of his place in society as a bastard and are cause for sympathy, the path that he eventually takes, choosing to pursue his own interests at the cost of his brother and father’s wellbeing, ultimately overrides any sympathy his initial words evoke. Certainly he is a product of the society into which he is born, but his decision to strive for his own gains without regard for the safety of his family is inexcusable and turns him into a creature of evil. There is no question that Edmund is conflicted, but his gungho attitude with regard to his own ascension is unnerving at best.
Dustin Fong
Dustin Fong
King Lear, Act I.1, lines 256-267
FRANCE
Fairest Cordelia, that art most rich being poor,
Most choice forsaken, and most loved despised,
Thee and thy virtues here I seize upon.
Be it lawful I take up what's cast away.
Gods, gods! 'Tis strange that from their cold'st neglect
My love should kindle to inflamed respect.
Thy dowerless daughter, king, thrown to my chance,
Is queen of us, of ours, and our fair France.
Not all the dukes of wat'rish Burgundy
Can buy this unprized precious maid of me.
Bid them farewell, Cordelia, though unkind.
Thou losest here, a better where to find.
Earlier in this scene, Lear virtually disowns Cordelia and both objectifies and commodifies her. This is evident when he tells Burgundy, "But now her price is fallen" (202). Burgundy likewise sees Cordelia not as a potential partner but as a commodity when he requests that Lear "Give but that portion which yourself proposed" (47).
In contrast, this quote by France demonstrates his love for Cordelia and his absence of desire for selfish economic gain. France heavily uses the pairing of opposite words and phrases to convey this. By stating that Cordelia "art most rich being poor," France notes that Cordelia will profit by gaining his genuine love, despite being monetarily poor from being disowned by her father. In contrast, if she had married Burgundy, she would have been poor in terms of both money and love. France describes her as "most loved despised." By drawing attention to Lear's lack of love for his daughter, France is able to highlight his own love for Cordelia. Similarly, he contrasts Lear's "cold'st neglect" for Cordelia to his own "inflamed respect" for her, to further emphasize his ability to love her without regard for how little she is valued by others. Finally, France states to Cordelia, "thou losest here, a better where to find" (13). This emphasizes that while Cordelia has lost her relationship with her father, and the opportunity to marry Burgundy, she is still gaining a new life with France. By stating that Cordelia is both losing and gaining in her life, he counteracts upon King Lear's earlier description of Cordelia as an object and humanizes her as one who can possess love.
Fairest Cordelia, that art most rich being poor,
Most choice forsaken, and most loved despised,
Thee and thy virtues here I seize upon.
Be it lawful I take up what's cast away.
Gods, gods! 'Tis strange that from their cold'st neglect
My love should kindle to inflamed respect.
Thy dowerless daughter, king, thrown to my chance,
Is queen of us, of ours, and our fair France.
Not all the dukes of wat'rish Burgundy
Can buy this unprized precious maid of me.
Bid them farewell, Cordelia, though unkind.
Thou losest here, a better where to find.
Earlier in this scene, Lear virtually disowns Cordelia and both objectifies and commodifies her. This is evident when he tells Burgundy, "But now her price is fallen" (202). Burgundy likewise sees Cordelia not as a potential partner but as a commodity when he requests that Lear "Give but that portion which yourself proposed" (47).
In contrast, this quote by France demonstrates his love for Cordelia and his absence of desire for selfish economic gain. France heavily uses the pairing of opposite words and phrases to convey this. By stating that Cordelia "art most rich being poor," France notes that Cordelia will profit by gaining his genuine love, despite being monetarily poor from being disowned by her father. In contrast, if she had married Burgundy, she would have been poor in terms of both money and love. France describes her as "most loved despised." By drawing attention to Lear's lack of love for his daughter, France is able to highlight his own love for Cordelia. Similarly, he contrasts Lear's "cold'st neglect" for Cordelia to his own "inflamed respect" for her, to further emphasize his ability to love her without regard for how little she is valued by others. Finally, France states to Cordelia, "thou losest here, a better where to find" (13). This emphasizes that while Cordelia has lost her relationship with her father, and the opportunity to marry Burgundy, she is still gaining a new life with France. By stating that Cordelia is both losing and gaining in her life, he counteracts upon King Lear's earlier description of Cordelia as an object and humanizes her as one who can possess love.
Fools and Kings
King Lear I.4, lines 114-130
FOOL Mark it, nuncle.
Have more than thou showest,
Speak less than thou knowest,
Lend less than thou owest,
Ride more than thou goest,
Learn more than thou trowest,
Set less than thou throwest;
Leave thy drink and thy whore,
And keep in-a-door,
And thou shalt have more
Than two tens to a score.
KENT This is nothing, fool.
FOOL Then ‘tis like the breath of an unfee’d lawyer –
you gave me nothing for’t. Can you make no use of
nothing, nuncle?
LEAR Why, no, boy. Nothing can be made out of noth-
ing.
The Fool’s song stands out from the surrounding text because of its sing-song rhythm and rhyme. Just as the shift from prose to verse (and vice versa) points to the importance either of a character in terms of status or of the message within the respective lines, the Fool’s characteristic songs convey significant insight into Lear’s situation. In addition, they contain a great deal of reason and wisdom, that which Lear apparently lacks. This construct ironizes Lear’s character with regard to the Fool by effectively subverting the presumptions of what each one should be; Lear, the king, shows himself a fool, while the Fool speaks the wisdom that a king should possess.
This reversal of roles parallels the situation with Lear and his daughters, Regan and Goneril. Having pared his kingdom and power betwixt the two, Lear leaves himself at their charge, positioning him as a child charged by his children. The Fool asks Lear, “Can you make no use of nothing nuncle?” Lear answers that naught comes from naught, just as he said of Cordelia’s initial response to his question of love. Ironically, his actions prove the statement true, in ways he likely did not fathom. The two daughter’s to which he gives everything have nothing for him, at least not in terms of real love or concern (in spite of their speeches). In banishing Cordelia and giving up his wealth and power, he loses everything, leaving himself with nothing, a result of whim and anger, anger produced by nothing (Cordelia’s truthful and appropriate response) interpreted as something (again, ironically- if nothing be the lack of something- nothing, here as lack of love).
~Katlyn Rodriguez
FOOL Mark it, nuncle.
Have more than thou showest,
Speak less than thou knowest,
Lend less than thou owest,
Ride more than thou goest,
Learn more than thou trowest,
Set less than thou throwest;
Leave thy drink and thy whore,
And keep in-a-door,
And thou shalt have more
Than two tens to a score.
KENT This is nothing, fool.
FOOL Then ‘tis like the breath of an unfee’d lawyer –
you gave me nothing for’t. Can you make no use of
nothing, nuncle?
LEAR Why, no, boy. Nothing can be made out of noth-
ing.
The Fool’s song stands out from the surrounding text because of its sing-song rhythm and rhyme. Just as the shift from prose to verse (and vice versa) points to the importance either of a character in terms of status or of the message within the respective lines, the Fool’s characteristic songs convey significant insight into Lear’s situation. In addition, they contain a great deal of reason and wisdom, that which Lear apparently lacks. This construct ironizes Lear’s character with regard to the Fool by effectively subverting the presumptions of what each one should be; Lear, the king, shows himself a fool, while the Fool speaks the wisdom that a king should possess.
This reversal of roles parallels the situation with Lear and his daughters, Regan and Goneril. Having pared his kingdom and power betwixt the two, Lear leaves himself at their charge, positioning him as a child charged by his children. The Fool asks Lear, “Can you make no use of nothing nuncle?” Lear answers that naught comes from naught, just as he said of Cordelia’s initial response to his question of love. Ironically, his actions prove the statement true, in ways he likely did not fathom. The two daughter’s to which he gives everything have nothing for him, at least not in terms of real love or concern (in spite of their speeches). In banishing Cordelia and giving up his wealth and power, he loses everything, leaving himself with nothing, a result of whim and anger, anger produced by nothing (Cordelia’s truthful and appropriate response) interpreted as something (again, ironically- if nothing be the lack of something- nothing, here as lack of love).
~Katlyn Rodriguez
King Lear 1.1.96-104
In this passage, Cordelia explains to King Lear why she cannot verbally express her love for him as her sisters so easily do. For Cordelia, love is a matter of obeying, loving, and honoring her father, rather than merely the exercise of speech. In this speech is also embedded the question of duty and to whom it is owed. Cordelia understands that she owes duty to her father, and is willing to give him what he deserves in repayment for having "begot me, bred me, loved me" (1.1.96). In this, duty becomes a sort of economic tranIn this passage, Cordelia explains to King Lear why she cannot verbally express her love for him as her sisters so easily do. For Cordelia, love is a matter of obeying, loving, and honoring her father, rather than merely the exercise of speech. In this speech is also embedded the question of duty and to whom it is owed. Cordelia understands that she owes duty to her father, and is willing to give him what he deserves in repayment for having "begot me, bred me, loved me" (1.1.96). In this, duty becomes a sort of economic transaction. Her response is her repayment for all he has done. Similarly, when she weds, “that lord whose hand must take my plight shall carry / Half my love with him, half my care and duty” (1.1.100-101). Upon marriage, her duty will be split in half between her father and her husband because it is what is owed to them. It becomes something that is exchanged in a give and take transaction. This allows for a greater level of sincerity because her conception of duty is not muddled by personal considerations and motives, but is rather based on an objective standard of exchange and repayment.
Erika Stephens
Erika Stephens
Measure for Measure:Political Body and Natural Body
Political Body and Natural Body:
by Matthew Nunez
In Measure for Measure, there are two types of categories that the body of the Duke is split into. First is the concept of a “Body Politic”; this is a notion that says that the ruler/king/Duke is the embodiment of the nation (in this case Vienna). Also that this ruler’s legacy will live on even after he dies (an example of this would be the phrase “Long live the King”). Second, there is the “Natural Body” which is the physical body of the ruler and all the human desires that come along with it (love, lust, hunger, etc.).
These two separate “Bodies” come in conflict with each other because the political body and the Duke desires cannot be united without conflicting with one another. The “Body Politic” is what ends up being the solution that the Duke utilizes. This aspect of rule is what establishes a functioning society in Vienna.
by Matthew Nunez
In Measure for Measure, there are two types of categories that the body of the Duke is split into. First is the concept of a “Body Politic”; this is a notion that says that the ruler/king/Duke is the embodiment of the nation (in this case Vienna). Also that this ruler’s legacy will live on even after he dies (an example of this would be the phrase “Long live the King”). Second, there is the “Natural Body” which is the physical body of the ruler and all the human desires that come along with it (love, lust, hunger, etc.).
These two separate “Bodies” come in conflict with each other because the political body and the Duke desires cannot be united without conflicting with one another. The “Body Politic” is what ends up being the solution that the Duke utilizes. This aspect of rule is what establishes a functioning society in Vienna.
Othello (3, 4, 26-29)
Des: Believe me, I had rather have lost my purse/ Full of crusadoes; and but my noble Moor/ Is true of mind, and made no such baseness/ As jealous creatures are, it were enough/To put him to ill thinking (III, iv, lines 26-29)
This quote takes place at the point where Desdemona is searching for her lost handkerchief. The handkerchief that was given to Desdemona by Othello and is a very significant object in the play in essence that it is symbolic on many different levels. This quote shows the importance of it to Desdemona and Othello as she states she would have rather lost a purse full of money than to have lost that handkerchief that Othello had given her. She goes on to describe him of having a rational nature, and stating that he would not become upset or jealous at finding that she has lost it, which has an affect on the play and the audience because it is clear that obvious that it does bother him. Also, it dramatizes Iago's plan in showing the small actions he took to have an affect to the extent that a normally rational being could jump to conclusions or become as upset as the Othello does. Because the handkerchief initially appears to be a symbol of their love, it furthers Othello's suspicions of Desdemona's infidelity. This can be concluded by the fact that it was the first gift Othello had ever given to Desdemona, and also from sentimental value of the handkerchief as it was handed down to him by his mother who told him to give it to his future wife, and because she used it to keep Othello’s father loving her. Desdemona states that the loss of the handkerchief would be enough to make Othello think badly of her if her were a jealous creature, showing it to be a symbol of their love for both partners. It can also be argued that the handkerchief symbolizes fidelity in that the initial purpose of it (when it belonged to Othello’s mother) was to keep Othello’s father from straying. The third thing that the handkerchief symbolizes as many scholars have interpreted it is purity or virginity. The strawberries on the cloth reminds the audience of the consummation of the marriage in which the sheets are bled on if the wife is a virgin. Also, the idea of the handkerchief representing pureness or virginity is exemplified by the history of the cloth in that it was decorated with the blood of mummified virgins.
-Komel Soin
This quote takes place at the point where Desdemona is searching for her lost handkerchief. The handkerchief that was given to Desdemona by Othello and is a very significant object in the play in essence that it is symbolic on many different levels. This quote shows the importance of it to Desdemona and Othello as she states she would have rather lost a purse full of money than to have lost that handkerchief that Othello had given her. She goes on to describe him of having a rational nature, and stating that he would not become upset or jealous at finding that she has lost it, which has an affect on the play and the audience because it is clear that obvious that it does bother him. Also, it dramatizes Iago's plan in showing the small actions he took to have an affect to the extent that a normally rational being could jump to conclusions or become as upset as the Othello does. Because the handkerchief initially appears to be a symbol of their love, it furthers Othello's suspicions of Desdemona's infidelity. This can be concluded by the fact that it was the first gift Othello had ever given to Desdemona, and also from sentimental value of the handkerchief as it was handed down to him by his mother who told him to give it to his future wife, and because she used it to keep Othello’s father loving her. Desdemona states that the loss of the handkerchief would be enough to make Othello think badly of her if her were a jealous creature, showing it to be a symbol of their love for both partners. It can also be argued that the handkerchief symbolizes fidelity in that the initial purpose of it (when it belonged to Othello’s mother) was to keep Othello’s father from straying. The third thing that the handkerchief symbolizes as many scholars have interpreted it is purity or virginity. The strawberries on the cloth reminds the audience of the consummation of the marriage in which the sheets are bled on if the wife is a virgin. Also, the idea of the handkerchief representing pureness or virginity is exemplified by the history of the cloth in that it was decorated with the blood of mummified virgins.
-Komel Soin
King Lear I.i
CORDELIA Unhappy that I am, I cannot heave
My heart into my mouth. I love your majesty
According to my bond, no more nor less.
LEAR How, How, Cordelia. Mend your speech a little,
Lest you may mar your fortunes
From the beginning of the play Lear shows his desire for physical and sensual evidence. He rejects Cordelia's real, impalpable love in favor of an ostensible love that is confirmed through speech, however fake and pretentious it may be. Cordelia loves Lear through her familial bond with him, and is unable to lie for personal gain, but Lear doesn't approve of this as he has no way of confirming it, even though Cordelia was his favorite.
In addition, this passage shows Lear's views on family. Lear cannot make a distinction between the family and the political realm, and the love of his daughters is treated with the same regard as his people. Lear therefore has his daughters speak eloquently of their love not in private, as it could and should have been done, but ceremonously in public. This show of love could have well been done with any of his subjects, perhaps nobles competing for power, had Lear not any children, and thus shows the bleeding of family and political lines by Lear.
My heart into my mouth. I love your majesty
According to my bond, no more nor less.
LEAR How, How, Cordelia. Mend your speech a little,
Lest you may mar your fortunes
From the beginning of the play Lear shows his desire for physical and sensual evidence. He rejects Cordelia's real, impalpable love in favor of an ostensible love that is confirmed through speech, however fake and pretentious it may be. Cordelia loves Lear through her familial bond with him, and is unable to lie for personal gain, but Lear doesn't approve of this as he has no way of confirming it, even though Cordelia was his favorite.
In addition, this passage shows Lear's views on family. Lear cannot make a distinction between the family and the political realm, and the love of his daughters is treated with the same regard as his people. Lear therefore has his daughters speak eloquently of their love not in private, as it could and should have been done, but ceremonously in public. This show of love could have well been done with any of his subjects, perhaps nobles competing for power, had Lear not any children, and thus shows the bleeding of family and political lines by Lear.
Honesty and Trust
Within both Othello and King Lear, the question of love for one's father is posed. Both Desdemona and Cordelia claim to love their father, but also reserve half that love for their husbands. There nature, through honest answers, are contrasted to the natures of those around them. Iago pledges loyalty and love for Othello to his face, yet secretly plots his master's demise. Cordelia's sisters give long, flowery speeches of the love they hold for their father, yet, in actuality, are hoping only for a greater inheritance, and a quicker transfer of power. Those who claim to give 100% of their love, are not giving half, or even 1%. Their true natures reveal the only person they truly love are themselves.
It is an interesting lesson Shakespeare is giving. He was a man known for his powerful verse and words, his love sonnets are still used today! And yet, his overall message is meant to convey how little meaning words have when the heart does not follow the tongue.
Also interesting to note, the commendable characters within both plays are women. In a time when women were seen to follow the path of Eve, leading men towards temptation and salvation, Cordelia and Desdemona provide an account of the honesty within women. And it is the failure of men to trust which leads to the tragic downfall within both plays. Shakespeare is offering a salvation through these women, not just for the characters of his plays, but for the readers, the audience, and the generations to follow.
Mallory Braus
It is an interesting lesson Shakespeare is giving. He was a man known for his powerful verse and words, his love sonnets are still used today! And yet, his overall message is meant to convey how little meaning words have when the heart does not follow the tongue.
Also interesting to note, the commendable characters within both plays are women. In a time when women were seen to follow the path of Eve, leading men towards temptation and salvation, Cordelia and Desdemona provide an account of the honesty within women. And it is the failure of men to trust which leads to the tragic downfall within both plays. Shakespeare is offering a salvation through these women, not just for the characters of his plays, but for the readers, the audience, and the generations to follow.
Mallory Braus
The Baby Beats the Nurse
We have strict statutes and most biting laws,
The needful bits and curbs to headstrong weeds.
Which of this fourteen years we have let slip,
Even like an o’vergrown lion in a cave,
That goes not out to prey. Now, as found fathers,
Having bound up the threat’ning twigs of birch.
Only to stick it in their children’s sight
For Terror, not to use; in time the rod
Becomes more mocked than feared; so our decrees,
Dead to infliction, to themselves are dead,
And liberty plucks Justice by the nose;
The baby beats the nurse, and quite athwart
Goes all decorum.
In this passage the Duke is speaking to the Friar about the conditions of the law in Venice. Through the Duke, Shakespeare acknowledges the need for terror and love when it comes to ruling. Niccolo Machiavelli, an Italian writer of the 14th century, described that every ruler wishes to have fear and love from his/her people. The fear is to be used as a tool for administration of the law, while the love guarantees the allegiance of the people. This play interrogates the consequences of terror that is used as a mere threat rather than implemented and put into action. In the above passage the duke describes Venice as “the baby beats the nurse,” which clearly portrays the flaw in society. The power is in the wrong hands, and because of it—justice is being dismembered.
The language used in this passage pertains to the idea of the “language of bodies.” If the term “we” is followed in this passage we see it first being used in the first line referring to the Duke and the people of the Vienna. The second time it is used is in the third line when the Duke says “which for this fourteen years we have let slip.” The term “we” in this line only pertains to the Duke and his belief that he has been inviting immorality into Venice over the past several years. Although being represented by the same term, the Duke shifts the blame for the failure of the Vienna society from the people who acted against the law, to himself for not ruling in a proper manner.
Sadia Mirza
The needful bits and curbs to headstrong weeds.
Which of this fourteen years we have let slip,
Even like an o’vergrown lion in a cave,
That goes not out to prey. Now, as found fathers,
Having bound up the threat’ning twigs of birch.
Only to stick it in their children’s sight
For Terror, not to use; in time the rod
Becomes more mocked than feared; so our decrees,
Dead to infliction, to themselves are dead,
And liberty plucks Justice by the nose;
The baby beats the nurse, and quite athwart
Goes all decorum.
In this passage the Duke is speaking to the Friar about the conditions of the law in Venice. Through the Duke, Shakespeare acknowledges the need for terror and love when it comes to ruling. Niccolo Machiavelli, an Italian writer of the 14th century, described that every ruler wishes to have fear and love from his/her people. The fear is to be used as a tool for administration of the law, while the love guarantees the allegiance of the people. This play interrogates the consequences of terror that is used as a mere threat rather than implemented and put into action. In the above passage the duke describes Venice as “the baby beats the nurse,” which clearly portrays the flaw in society. The power is in the wrong hands, and because of it—justice is being dismembered.
The language used in this passage pertains to the idea of the “language of bodies.” If the term “we” is followed in this passage we see it first being used in the first line referring to the Duke and the people of the Vienna. The second time it is used is in the third line when the Duke says “which for this fourteen years we have let slip.” The term “we” in this line only pertains to the Duke and his belief that he has been inviting immorality into Venice over the past several years. Although being represented by the same term, the Duke shifts the blame for the failure of the Vienna society from the people who acted against the law, to himself for not ruling in a proper manner.
Sadia Mirza
Othello: Act III; Scene III; Lines 345-357
I had been happy, if the general camp,
Pioners and all, had tasted her sweet body,
So I had nothing known. O now, for ever
Farewell the tranquil mind! Farewell content!
Farewell the plumed troops and the big wars
That makes ambition virtue! O, farewell!
Farewell the neighing steed and the shrill trump,
The spirit-stirring drum, th' ear-piercing fife,
The royal banner, and all quality,
Pride, pomp, and circumstance of glorious war!
And O you mortal engines, whose rude throats
Th' immortal Jove's dread clamors counterfeit,
Farewell. Othello's occupation's gone.
In this speech, we have a surprisingly prescient, self-aware, version of Othello. He is, at this point, beginning his descend into madness. Iago has just planted, within his mind, the growing 'idea' of Desdemona's infidelity, and our titular character bemoans the appearance of this newfound suspicion. Throughout his speech, it is as if Othello can see and predict the extent to which his jealousy will grab a hold of his heart and soul. Already he realizes that the matter will overtake his life, and make all else pointless.
Quite simply, Othello is bidding adieu to his former identity as a soldier, and "welcoming" (or rather, dreading) the coming of his new identity, as a jealous husband. He says "farewell" to a list of war-related images, and his wording implies, at once, a veneration for the life of a soldier, as well as an apparent understanding of the ruthless blood-soaked depravity of the battlefield. That is, though Othello seems earnestly nostalgic for war, he is also somewhat damning in his word choices. Ergo, he presents a dual picture.
He begins his speech by alluding to a "tranquil mind" and feeling "content," and then segues into "plumed troops" and "big wars." He is lumping all of these 'items' into the same metaphoric bag; they are the 'items' of his past. Therefore, there is a connection between being "tranquil" and "content," and participating in "wars." The latter breeds the former, or maybe, the former exists within the latter. Either way, for Othello, memories of a peaceful "mind" coincide with memories of "troops" and wartime. Which signifies that he views soldiering in good terms, as far as his mental/emotional state is concerned. He then makes more similarly positive comments, mentioning a "spirit-stirring drum" and "glorious war."
Nevertheless, he also includes some rather negative connotations. The "fife" is "ear-piercing," the "trump" is "shrill," and the "mortal engines" (the cannons), have "rude throats." Despite the apparent peace and tranquility of his former "occupation," Othello still evokes a glimmer of wartime terror. He juxtaposes the "troops," the "banners," and all that "pomp," with a disconcerting, terrifying, aural cacophony, giving us a view of war at once idealized and horrifying.
Still, Othello is more emphatic in his praise than in his criticism. And this is fitting, as he is mourning the loss of his soldiering life. Othello clearly understands the power of his jealousy. He divorces cause (infidelity) from effect (jealousy) by implying that he would have been "happy" if he had "nothing known" of Desdemona's misdoings. This makes 'jealousy' into an individual entity; or, as Emilia calls it later, into a "monster." Othello is not so much angry at his wife's actions. He is angry at his perceived 'knowledge' or suspicion of those actions. What matters to Othello is not what Desdemona has actually done, but rather, that his jealousy has been woken from its slumber and given free reign. Knowing the strength of its grasp, Othello thus screams "farewell" to his former "occupation," along with all the 'items' that it once entailed. He has become a new man, so to speak. A man led by the "monster" of jealousy. No longer does his life revolve around war. Now it revolves around suspicion, doubt, insanity, and distrust.
We get, then, a character who is led by his emotions, and who even realizes how his emotions will take a hold of his psyche, renouncing all that once defined his nature. In many ways, Othello resembles King Lear. Both are victims of rash emotional tempers. The former is led unthinkingly into blind jealousy, and so murders his wife. The latter is led by unthinking pride, and so renounces his daughter. In both cases, the men only come to see how they have strayed, after they have dealt their punishment on the focal woman, although Lear is allowed a reunion with his 'victim.'
~ Guido Pellegrini
Pioners and all, had tasted her sweet body,
So I had nothing known. O now, for ever
Farewell the tranquil mind! Farewell content!
Farewell the plumed troops and the big wars
That makes ambition virtue! O, farewell!
Farewell the neighing steed and the shrill trump,
The spirit-stirring drum, th' ear-piercing fife,
The royal banner, and all quality,
Pride, pomp, and circumstance of glorious war!
And O you mortal engines, whose rude throats
Th' immortal Jove's dread clamors counterfeit,
Farewell. Othello's occupation's gone.
In this speech, we have a surprisingly prescient, self-aware, version of Othello. He is, at this point, beginning his descend into madness. Iago has just planted, within his mind, the growing 'idea' of Desdemona's infidelity, and our titular character bemoans the appearance of this newfound suspicion. Throughout his speech, it is as if Othello can see and predict the extent to which his jealousy will grab a hold of his heart and soul. Already he realizes that the matter will overtake his life, and make all else pointless.
Quite simply, Othello is bidding adieu to his former identity as a soldier, and "welcoming" (or rather, dreading) the coming of his new identity, as a jealous husband. He says "farewell" to a list of war-related images, and his wording implies, at once, a veneration for the life of a soldier, as well as an apparent understanding of the ruthless blood-soaked depravity of the battlefield. That is, though Othello seems earnestly nostalgic for war, he is also somewhat damning in his word choices. Ergo, he presents a dual picture.
He begins his speech by alluding to a "tranquil mind" and feeling "content," and then segues into "plumed troops" and "big wars." He is lumping all of these 'items' into the same metaphoric bag; they are the 'items' of his past. Therefore, there is a connection between being "tranquil" and "content," and participating in "wars." The latter breeds the former, or maybe, the former exists within the latter. Either way, for Othello, memories of a peaceful "mind" coincide with memories of "troops" and wartime. Which signifies that he views soldiering in good terms, as far as his mental/emotional state is concerned. He then makes more similarly positive comments, mentioning a "spirit-stirring drum" and "glorious war."
Nevertheless, he also includes some rather negative connotations. The "fife" is "ear-piercing," the "trump" is "shrill," and the "mortal engines" (the cannons), have "rude throats." Despite the apparent peace and tranquility of his former "occupation," Othello still evokes a glimmer of wartime terror. He juxtaposes the "troops," the "banners," and all that "pomp," with a disconcerting, terrifying, aural cacophony, giving us a view of war at once idealized and horrifying.
Still, Othello is more emphatic in his praise than in his criticism. And this is fitting, as he is mourning the loss of his soldiering life. Othello clearly understands the power of his jealousy. He divorces cause (infidelity) from effect (jealousy) by implying that he would have been "happy" if he had "nothing known" of Desdemona's misdoings. This makes 'jealousy' into an individual entity; or, as Emilia calls it later, into a "monster." Othello is not so much angry at his wife's actions. He is angry at his perceived 'knowledge' or suspicion of those actions. What matters to Othello is not what Desdemona has actually done, but rather, that his jealousy has been woken from its slumber and given free reign. Knowing the strength of its grasp, Othello thus screams "farewell" to his former "occupation," along with all the 'items' that it once entailed. He has become a new man, so to speak. A man led by the "monster" of jealousy. No longer does his life revolve around war. Now it revolves around suspicion, doubt, insanity, and distrust.
We get, then, a character who is led by his emotions, and who even realizes how his emotions will take a hold of his psyche, renouncing all that once defined his nature. In many ways, Othello resembles King Lear. Both are victims of rash emotional tempers. The former is led unthinkingly into blind jealousy, and so murders his wife. The latter is led by unthinking pride, and so renounces his daughter. In both cases, the men only come to see how they have strayed, after they have dealt their punishment on the focal woman, although Lear is allowed a reunion with his 'victim.'
~ Guido Pellegrini
1.1.35 “his moorships ancient”
1.1.35 “his moorships ancient”
This passage spoken by Iago comes as Rodrigo and Iago discuss Othello at the beginning of Othello . This is the first time that Othello is referred to as anything other than the pronoun of him. The fact that Rodrigo and Iago only discuss Othello in these terms is important because it sets Othello apart from these characters and into a lower class because he does not deserve to be referred to using a name. When the Iago stops referring to Othello with a pronoun, we see that he is referred to as a moorship. While initiating the pattern of referring to Othello as a moor, Iago also mocks the hierarchical legal system of the time through equating moorship to lordship. While the association with lordship seems like a positive acknowledgement of someone being in powered, the addition of moor and the Moroccan culture marks Othello as an outsider. As in the case of Cassio’s association with the Florentines, outsiders who were not from Venice were frowned upon. Drawing attention to Othello’s geographical otheredness is a motif we see throughout the play. It is in naming that we see Othello removed from being thought of as an individual, and instead is associated with a linguistic category. Iago’s mocking behavior makes the characters and the audience uncomfortable and raises both parties suspicions about his intentions
heather gordon
This passage spoken by Iago comes as Rodrigo and Iago discuss Othello at the beginning of Othello . This is the first time that Othello is referred to as anything other than the pronoun of him. The fact that Rodrigo and Iago only discuss Othello in these terms is important because it sets Othello apart from these characters and into a lower class because he does not deserve to be referred to using a name. When the Iago stops referring to Othello with a pronoun, we see that he is referred to as a moorship. While initiating the pattern of referring to Othello as a moor, Iago also mocks the hierarchical legal system of the time through equating moorship to lordship. While the association with lordship seems like a positive acknowledgement of someone being in powered, the addition of moor and the Moroccan culture marks Othello as an outsider. As in the case of Cassio’s association with the Florentines, outsiders who were not from Venice were frowned upon. Drawing attention to Othello’s geographical otheredness is a motif we see throughout the play. It is in naming that we see Othello removed from being thought of as an individual, and instead is associated with a linguistic category. Iago’s mocking behavior makes the characters and the audience uncomfortable and raises both parties suspicions about his intentions
heather gordon
Cecilia Guevara
Isabella: Because authority, though it err like others/ Hath yet a kind of medicine in itself/ […] Go to your bosom; knock there and ask your heart what it doth know/ That’s like my brothers fault. If it confesses a natural guiltiness such as his/Let it not sound a thought upon your tongue/ Against my brother’s life.
II.II. 139-146
This passage points to the body imagery and language that runs throughout the play and demonstrates how Isabella uses this language in attempt to persuade Angelo to spare Claudio’s life. The fact that authority has the capacity to “err” demonstrates that authority (and punishment) is linked to human frailty and justice is dependent upon the person holds authority and distributes justice. However this bleak interpretation of the subjectivity of justice is countered when Isabella claims that justice has a “medicine in itself.” Isabella identifies the homeopathic capacity of justice and hopes that the same “human” element of justice (and the ruler) will serve to save her brother’s life. Isabella appeals to Angelo’s humanity and asks him to recall a time when he made a “human” mistake.
Sadly, Isabella’s use of pathos in the attempt to save her brother backfires because (as we’ve mentioned in class) Angelo does not appear to be human. Thus, he does not confess any “natural guiltiness” and refuses to free Claudio. However, we later discover that this superhuman quality of Angelo is merely a political tactic. Angelo is, in fact, human. Yet what moves Angelo is not affect, but sexual desire. Isabella appeals to Angelo’s baser human qualities and must satisfy Angelo’s baser desires in order to save Claudio.
II.II. 139-146
This passage points to the body imagery and language that runs throughout the play and demonstrates how Isabella uses this language in attempt to persuade Angelo to spare Claudio’s life. The fact that authority has the capacity to “err” demonstrates that authority (and punishment) is linked to human frailty and justice is dependent upon the person holds authority and distributes justice. However this bleak interpretation of the subjectivity of justice is countered when Isabella claims that justice has a “medicine in itself.” Isabella identifies the homeopathic capacity of justice and hopes that the same “human” element of justice (and the ruler) will serve to save her brother’s life. Isabella appeals to Angelo’s humanity and asks him to recall a time when he made a “human” mistake.
Sadly, Isabella’s use of pathos in the attempt to save her brother backfires because (as we’ve mentioned in class) Angelo does not appear to be human. Thus, he does not confess any “natural guiltiness” and refuses to free Claudio. However, we later discover that this superhuman quality of Angelo is merely a political tactic. Angelo is, in fact, human. Yet what moves Angelo is not affect, but sexual desire. Isabella appeals to Angelo’s baser human qualities and must satisfy Angelo’s baser desires in order to save Claudio.
Gloucester's loss of vision gives him clarity...
King Lear, IV.I (19-24)
Old Man: You cannot see your way.
Gloucester: I have no way, and therefore want no eyes;
I stumbled when I saw. Full oft ‘tis seen
Our means secure us, and our mere defects
Prove our commodities. Oh dear son Edgar,
The food of thy abused father’s wrath,
Might I but live to see in my touch
I’d say I had eyes again.
When Gloucester still has his eyes, he is blind to his two son’s true intentions. Gloucester is ignorant and foolishly falls for Edmund’s jealous scheme and casts away his true and loving son and heir, Edgar. This is why he says, “I stumbled when I saw”. Gloucester is crazy to assume such rash and unrealistic thoughts about his loving and loyal son, Edgar. This parallels the relationship between Cordelia and Lear; both fathers are blind to which of their children really love them until it is too late. After Gloucester has lost everything, including his eyes, he realizes his horrible mistake at falling for Edmund’s trick and rejecting Edgar. Ironically, it is Gloucester’s loss of vision that allows him to finally see. The Old Man he is talking to in this passage is actually Edgar in disguise so at least before the play is over he is able to tell Edgar how sorry he is for mistake and to tell him of his love for him as a father.
Old Man: You cannot see your way.
Gloucester: I have no way, and therefore want no eyes;
I stumbled when I saw. Full oft ‘tis seen
Our means secure us, and our mere defects
Prove our commodities. Oh dear son Edgar,
The food of thy abused father’s wrath,
Might I but live to see in my touch
I’d say I had eyes again.
When Gloucester still has his eyes, he is blind to his two son’s true intentions. Gloucester is ignorant and foolishly falls for Edmund’s jealous scheme and casts away his true and loving son and heir, Edgar. This is why he says, “I stumbled when I saw”. Gloucester is crazy to assume such rash and unrealistic thoughts about his loving and loyal son, Edgar. This parallels the relationship between Cordelia and Lear; both fathers are blind to which of their children really love them until it is too late. After Gloucester has lost everything, including his eyes, he realizes his horrible mistake at falling for Edmund’s trick and rejecting Edgar. Ironically, it is Gloucester’s loss of vision that allows him to finally see. The Old Man he is talking to in this passage is actually Edgar in disguise so at least before the play is over he is able to tell Edgar how sorry he is for mistake and to tell him of his love for him as a father.
Othello I.ii.49-52
Cassio: "Ancient, what makes he here?"
Iago: "Faith, he to-night hath boarded a land carract. / If it prove lawful prize, he's made for ever."
Cassio: "I do not understand"
This passage comes where Iago mentions to Cassio before leaving that Othello has married. demonstrates his delicate choice of wording, and his ability to use wording effectively. Usually accompanying his words, that other's would not understand right away as Cassio demonstrates, is a double meaning. While Iago first describes Othello's marriage to Desdemona, he also creates a double meaning with the image of Othello boarding a carract, or boat. While Desdemona serves as the image of a boat, Othello is meant to symbolize one invading and taking control of the boat, similar to a pirate. Here, the language directed toward Othello is one with negative connotations, a description that occurs multiple times within the text. Iago's language becomes a central part of the story, as his words are the fuel that moves the story along. Iago's overall ability to manipulate people around him is also shadowed by his ability to manipulate his words to mean more than one thing.
Iago: "Faith, he to-night hath boarded a land carract. / If it prove lawful prize, he's made for ever."
Cassio: "I do not understand"
This passage comes where Iago mentions to Cassio before leaving that Othello has married. demonstrates his delicate choice of wording, and his ability to use wording effectively. Usually accompanying his words, that other's would not understand right away as Cassio demonstrates, is a double meaning. While Iago first describes Othello's marriage to Desdemona, he also creates a double meaning with the image of Othello boarding a carract, or boat. While Desdemona serves as the image of a boat, Othello is meant to symbolize one invading and taking control of the boat, similar to a pirate. Here, the language directed toward Othello is one with negative connotations, a description that occurs multiple times within the text. Iago's language becomes a central part of the story, as his words are the fuel that moves the story along. Iago's overall ability to manipulate people around him is also shadowed by his ability to manipulate his words to mean more than one thing.
Measure for Measure & Predjudice
Because the Duke and Friar Lodowick are in fact, the same person, this presents a unique echoing of characters. Both roles reflect a certain amount of power in their respective houses of law, and yet Lucio critiques both figures with the charge of manipulator. Shakespeare creates this trap for the Duke, he cannot act as a witness against this defamation because it would foil his plan. When the Friar stands up for the Duke, of course, he is defending his own name; the audience does not know what to believe; and they too are trapped. It is interesting that Lucio’s character is a soft whisper of the flawed Duke/Friar persona.
Because Lucio lies about his statements, it does however, complicate the notion of truth. If Shakespeare is proposing that Lucio is speaking the truth, he is likewise questioning at what means does it take to reveal the truth? Must there be some dishonesty in exposing the truth? Angelo also complicates the notion of truth when he says no one will believe Isabella over him. Likewise, the Friar Lodowick alludes that the Duke should be present to hear these claims against him, but then he begs the question to what it would prove? It would be one’s person’s word against another’s. Friar Lodowick dares Lucio to makes these allegations before the Duke. Lucio does not submit however to this charge. He does not argue to the Duke’s assertion of slander. Both past and present leaders have now asserted that their word would be held above the inferior party’s. This notion of one person’s word against another is raised multiple times throughout the text. In the first instance, Isabella tells Angelo that she will make known his blackmail. There seems to be a hierarchy in terms of when one person’s word is against another’s. Public figures that are recognized as having a higher moral or social status could possibly be perceived as possessing more honest traits. People could be likewise more lenient to figures that they are more familiar with. For example, when Lucio claims:
My lord, I know him: ‘tis a meddling friar,
I do not like the man. Had he been lay, my Lord,
For certain words he spake against your Grace In your retirement,
I had swinged him soundly. (V.i. 127-130)
The Duke is put in a position where he cannot challenge the claims because technically, he wasn’t there to witness these remarks against him. This brings forth the legal question of what happens when there are opposing testimonies, when both parties swear under oath they are telling, “The Whole Truth…” As the play ventures onward, again, the notion of one person’s word against another is raised when the Duke exits and comes forth as the Friar Lodowick. At this point, everyone believes that he is guilty of the crime Lucio has charged him with. This is an interesting development because at this point Escalus and Angelo have sided with Lucio. This is fascinating because the Friar is a man of the cloth, and it would seem that there might perhaps be a prejudice that he would not lie, despite this, there is still more faith invested in Lucio by both Escalus and Angelo:
Escalus. Slander to th’ state! Away with him to prison!
Angelo. What can you vouch against him, Signior Lucio?
Is this the man that you did tell us of? Lucio.
‘Tis he, my lord. (V.i. 324-327)
What does this do then, when there is preferential treatment of one individual over another? In legal terms, this challenges the very notion of justice, of fairness. Shakespeare here is presenting a very human condition where biases are often hard to break. Therefore rulers and judges must specifically refrain from creating a predisposition for any person. For this society however, it difficult for them to cease from doing this, as Angelo and Escalus prove. There is a prejudice in society that one person’s word might be higher than another’s.
-Vanessa Gomez, Wang Section 1A
Because Lucio lies about his statements, it does however, complicate the notion of truth. If Shakespeare is proposing that Lucio is speaking the truth, he is likewise questioning at what means does it take to reveal the truth? Must there be some dishonesty in exposing the truth? Angelo also complicates the notion of truth when he says no one will believe Isabella over him. Likewise, the Friar Lodowick alludes that the Duke should be present to hear these claims against him, but then he begs the question to what it would prove? It would be one’s person’s word against another’s. Friar Lodowick dares Lucio to makes these allegations before the Duke. Lucio does not submit however to this charge. He does not argue to the Duke’s assertion of slander. Both past and present leaders have now asserted that their word would be held above the inferior party’s. This notion of one person’s word against another is raised multiple times throughout the text. In the first instance, Isabella tells Angelo that she will make known his blackmail. There seems to be a hierarchy in terms of when one person’s word is against another’s. Public figures that are recognized as having a higher moral or social status could possibly be perceived as possessing more honest traits. People could be likewise more lenient to figures that they are more familiar with. For example, when Lucio claims:
My lord, I know him: ‘tis a meddling friar,
I do not like the man. Had he been lay, my Lord,
For certain words he spake against your Grace In your retirement,
I had swinged him soundly. (V.i. 127-130)
The Duke is put in a position where he cannot challenge the claims because technically, he wasn’t there to witness these remarks against him. This brings forth the legal question of what happens when there are opposing testimonies, when both parties swear under oath they are telling, “The Whole Truth…” As the play ventures onward, again, the notion of one person’s word against another is raised when the Duke exits and comes forth as the Friar Lodowick. At this point, everyone believes that he is guilty of the crime Lucio has charged him with. This is an interesting development because at this point Escalus and Angelo have sided with Lucio. This is fascinating because the Friar is a man of the cloth, and it would seem that there might perhaps be a prejudice that he would not lie, despite this, there is still more faith invested in Lucio by both Escalus and Angelo:
Escalus. Slander to th’ state! Away with him to prison!
Angelo. What can you vouch against him, Signior Lucio?
Is this the man that you did tell us of? Lucio.
‘Tis he, my lord. (V.i. 324-327)
What does this do then, when there is preferential treatment of one individual over another? In legal terms, this challenges the very notion of justice, of fairness. Shakespeare here is presenting a very human condition where biases are often hard to break. Therefore rulers and judges must specifically refrain from creating a predisposition for any person. For this society however, it difficult for them to cease from doing this, as Angelo and Escalus prove. There is a prejudice in society that one person’s word might be higher than another’s.
-Vanessa Gomez, Wang Section 1A
Iago's duplicity in Act I, scene i, line 64 of Othello: "I am not what I am."
"Were I the Moor, I would not be Iago.
In following him, I follow but myself.
Heaven is my judge, not I for love and duty,
But seeming so, for my peculiar end,
For when my outward action doth demonstrate
The native act and figure of my heart
In complement extern, 'tis not long after
But I will wear my heart upon my sleeve
For daws to peck at. I am not what I am." (I, i, 64)
Here, Iago says that he serves Othello for himself, and that all masters are not honest or worthy, thereby granting himself the capacity to be dishonest. He keeps himself attending on himself; though he is in service, he is all about what he can take from service, not what he can give. There is a repetition of "the self," and he uses his words (ie. "heaven is my judge") as a means to an ends--an empty rhetoric because he is not committed to such a mode of ethics or morals. Iago's facade asserts that he follows Othello for love and duty, yet this passage claims Iago's true agenda. This speech calls attention to role-playing in metadrama, thus calling attention to itself as fiction, a kind of performativity of identity.
King Lear I. 1, 3-35.
GLOUCESTER:It did always seem so to us: but now, in thedivision of the kingdom, it appears not which ofthe dukes he values most; for equalities are soweighed, that curiosity in neither can make choice of either's moiety.
KENT: Is not this your son, my lord?
GLOUCESTER: His breeding, sir, hath been at my charge: I haveso often blushed to acknowledge him, that now I ambrazed to it.
KENT: I cannot conceive you.
GLOUCESTER: Sir, this young fellow's mother could: whereuponshe grew round-wombed, and had, indeed, sir, a sonfor her cradle ere she had a husband for her bed.Do you smell a fault?
KENT : I cannot wish the fault undone, the issue of itbeing so proper.
GLOUCESTER: But I have, sir, a son by order of law, some yearelder than this, who yet is no dearer in my account:though this knave came something saucily into theworld before he was sent for, yet was his motherfair; there was good sport at his making, and thewhoreson must be acknowledged. Do you know thisnoble gentleman, Edmund?
EDMUND: No, my lord.
GLOUCESTER: My lord of Kent: remember him hereafter as myhonourable friend.
EDMUND: My services to your lordship.
KENT: I must love you, and sue to know you better.
EDMUND: Sir, I shall study deserving.
GLOUCESTER: He hath been out nine years, and away he shallagain. The king is coming.
Sound a Sennet. Enter KING LEAR, CORNWALL, ALBANY, GONERIL, REGAN, CORDELIA, and Attendants
KING LEAR: Attend the lords of France and Burgundy, Gloucester.
GLOUCESTER: I shall, my liege.
Themes presented in lecture:
Power Hierarchy, Parallels, Quantification and Equation: In the first 33 lines of King Lear, Shakespeare uses informal prose to demonstrate that Gloucester and Kent are peers who are of relatively equal rank in the play. As mentioned by Professor Cunningham in lecture, the informality of the prose, as well as the bawdy and personal subject matter, implies that Gloucester is attempting to bond with Kent by slighting his bastard son Edmund. This exposes Edmund's lower social position and accentuates Gloucester's lack of control. To clarify, Gloucester's aggressive attempt to prove his dominance over his son (by acknowledging him in a halfhearted manner and calling him names like "the whoreson" (22)) suggests that Gloucester is not secure in his position. In contrast, the formal language used by Lear emphasizes his assumed and accepted position of authority. Verse is incorporated into the scene with Lear's first appearance, highlighting that Lear is of a higher position than the men he is conversing with. This shift from the colloquial speech exchanged between Gloucester, Edmund and Kent to the more courtly verse used by Lear illuminates that Lear is held above the other men in the hierarchy of the play. However, the switch also makes Lear seem more put-on and unapproachable than the other three. This detachment of Lear from the men (and later women) of his court is one of the key problems in the play. Lear's highbrow and egotistical demeanor leads to many of the misunderstandings, betrayals and tragedies that ensue in the course of the play. Similarly, Gloucester's fear of usurpation by his son causes a string of unfortunate events. Neither men are able to assert their authority in a balanced manner. This is a reoccurring motif that is also present in Measure for Measure. The idea of balance in the first scene of King Lear is aligned with the language of equation and quantification. When Gloucester speaks of "weighed" (5) equalities he is presenting the motif of quantification which pops up all over the play. The notion that favoritism can be scientifically measured or quantified is a problematic ideology that permeates the text. For instance, Cordalia's inability to verbally equate her love for her father to any other thing makes it apparent that love is not easily quantified. Yet, Lear insistently tries to force this quantification, puts more stock in words than motives and wrongly asserts his authority by disowning Cordalia. Likewise, Gloucester attempts to equate his two sons and states that Edgar "is no dearer in [his] account" (19) than Edmund. Gloucester's blind acceptance of Edmund's proclamation of Edgar's betrayal leads to Gloucester's demise. Hence, it is apparent that in these first few lines Shakespeare is highlighting personality traits in Gloucester which later helps align him with the King. Nonetheless, it is apparent that Lear is the alpha male in the play, as demonstrated with his dismissal of Gloucester and in his use of sophisticated language.
Rebecca Coleman
Waldo/ 142B 1D
KENT: Is not this your son, my lord?
GLOUCESTER: His breeding, sir, hath been at my charge: I haveso often blushed to acknowledge him, that now I ambrazed to it.
KENT: I cannot conceive you.
GLOUCESTER: Sir, this young fellow's mother could: whereuponshe grew round-wombed, and had, indeed, sir, a sonfor her cradle ere she had a husband for her bed.Do you smell a fault?
KENT : I cannot wish the fault undone, the issue of itbeing so proper.
GLOUCESTER: But I have, sir, a son by order of law, some yearelder than this, who yet is no dearer in my account:though this knave came something saucily into theworld before he was sent for, yet was his motherfair; there was good sport at his making, and thewhoreson must be acknowledged. Do you know thisnoble gentleman, Edmund?
EDMUND: No, my lord.
GLOUCESTER: My lord of Kent: remember him hereafter as myhonourable friend.
EDMUND: My services to your lordship.
KENT: I must love you, and sue to know you better.
EDMUND: Sir, I shall study deserving.
GLOUCESTER: He hath been out nine years, and away he shallagain. The king is coming.
Sound a Sennet. Enter KING LEAR, CORNWALL, ALBANY, GONERIL, REGAN, CORDELIA, and Attendants
KING LEAR: Attend the lords of France and Burgundy, Gloucester.
GLOUCESTER: I shall, my liege.
Themes presented in lecture:
Power Hierarchy, Parallels, Quantification and Equation: In the first 33 lines of King Lear, Shakespeare uses informal prose to demonstrate that Gloucester and Kent are peers who are of relatively equal rank in the play. As mentioned by Professor Cunningham in lecture, the informality of the prose, as well as the bawdy and personal subject matter, implies that Gloucester is attempting to bond with Kent by slighting his bastard son Edmund. This exposes Edmund's lower social position and accentuates Gloucester's lack of control. To clarify, Gloucester's aggressive attempt to prove his dominance over his son (by acknowledging him in a halfhearted manner and calling him names like "the whoreson" (22)) suggests that Gloucester is not secure in his position. In contrast, the formal language used by Lear emphasizes his assumed and accepted position of authority. Verse is incorporated into the scene with Lear's first appearance, highlighting that Lear is of a higher position than the men he is conversing with. This shift from the colloquial speech exchanged between Gloucester, Edmund and Kent to the more courtly verse used by Lear illuminates that Lear is held above the other men in the hierarchy of the play. However, the switch also makes Lear seem more put-on and unapproachable than the other three. This detachment of Lear from the men (and later women) of his court is one of the key problems in the play. Lear's highbrow and egotistical demeanor leads to many of the misunderstandings, betrayals and tragedies that ensue in the course of the play. Similarly, Gloucester's fear of usurpation by his son causes a string of unfortunate events. Neither men are able to assert their authority in a balanced manner. This is a reoccurring motif that is also present in Measure for Measure. The idea of balance in the first scene of King Lear is aligned with the language of equation and quantification. When Gloucester speaks of "weighed" (5) equalities he is presenting the motif of quantification which pops up all over the play. The notion that favoritism can be scientifically measured or quantified is a problematic ideology that permeates the text. For instance, Cordalia's inability to verbally equate her love for her father to any other thing makes it apparent that love is not easily quantified. Yet, Lear insistently tries to force this quantification, puts more stock in words than motives and wrongly asserts his authority by disowning Cordalia. Likewise, Gloucester attempts to equate his two sons and states that Edgar "is no dearer in [his] account" (19) than Edmund. Gloucester's blind acceptance of Edmund's proclamation of Edgar's betrayal leads to Gloucester's demise. Hence, it is apparent that in these first few lines Shakespeare is highlighting personality traits in Gloucester which later helps align him with the King. Nonetheless, it is apparent that Lear is the alpha male in the play, as demonstrated with his dismissal of Gloucester and in his use of sophisticated language.
Rebecca Coleman
Waldo/ 142B 1D
Measure for Measure Act III, i : the Duke's stoicism
“Be absolute for death; either death or life
Shall thereby be the sweeter.
Reason thus with life:
If I do lose thee, I do lose a thing
That none but fools would keep…
Thou art not noble;
For all the accommodations that thou bear ’st
Are nursed by baseness. Thou ’rt by no means valiant;
For thou dost fear the soft and tender fork
Of a poor worm. Thy best of rest is sleep,
And that thou oft provokest; yet grossly fear’st
Thy death, which is no more. Thou art not thyself;
For thou exist’st on many a thousand grains
That issue out of dust. Happy thou art not;
For what thou hast not, still thou strivest to get,
And what thou hast, forget’st. …
Friend hast thou none;
For thine own bowels, which do call thee sire,
The mere effusion of thy proper loins,
Do curse the gout, serpigo, and the rheum,
For ending thee no sooner. Thou hast nor youth nor age,
But, as it were, an after-dinner’s sleep,
Dreaming on both; for all they blessed youth
Becomes as aged, and doth beg the alms
Of palsied eld; and when thou art old and rich,
To make they riches pleasant.”
This speech from the disguised Duke to the imprisoned Claudio firmly establishes the Duke as a stoic. Stoicism, which originated in
The Duke’s language is absolute, expressing complete certainty, just like Angelo’s absolute conviction in the rigidity of the law and Isabella’s firm belief in mercy. By continuing to show these strict belief systems and their inadequacies (the Duke’s intention is to console Claudio, but this speech makes life and death seem like a lose/lose situation), Shakespeare allows the audience to understand that open-mindedness is often preferable.
The language in the passage follows the motif of the body present throughout Measure for Measure. For example, the Duke says that Claudio’s accommodations are “nursed by baseness,” emphasizing the physicality of the act that resulted in Claudio’s imprisonment. At the same time, the Duke belittles every aspect of the body, pointing out that it has “issued out of dust” and that after death it will be eaten by worms. By demeaning the importance of the body, the Duke indirectly indicates that he would not judge Claudio’s sexual activity so harshly, because he does not hold the body or its state in high regard.
The Duke’s discussion of the state of the human body could be interpreted as a metaphor for the state of the political body. Just as Claudio is helplessly controlled by his body’s “bowels”, “loins”, and aging, the subjects of a kingdom are helplessly controlled by the actions of the political body. Claudio’s freedoms are limited twice-over, which is perhaps why the Duke chose to encourage him to seek stoic indifference.
-- Jordan Avallone, Waldo section, R 1:00-2:00Father-Child relationship in King Lear
Professor Cunningham mentioned this briefly in lecture, so I thought it would be helpful to highlight the parallel relationships developed in King Lear, pairing Edgar/Edmund/Glouchester and Regan/Goneril/Cordelia/Lear. A previous poster lightly touched on the relationship between Lear and Cordelia, comparing the father/daughter relationship with Othello. Here, I’d like to pair Lear with Glouchester, and acknowledge their similar relationships with their children.
Both Glouchester and Lear share the quality of blindness – Glouchester’s comes in the physical form in III.vii, as
Lindsay Bajo
Waldo, Thursday 1-2pm
What comes from "nothing"? King Lear I.i.87-90
“CORDELIA Nothing, my lord.
LEAR Nothing?
CORDELIA Nothing.
LEAR Nothing will come of nothing. Speak again.”
King Lear I.i. 87-90
Nothing? That is the question. In King Lear we hear that word many times; more than once we hear Lear say that nothing will come of nothing. Yet, after reading the play one must ask whether or not this is true. The source of the conflict in this play comes from nothing; literally in Cordelia’s response, and ultimately because King Lear brought the issue of the love of his daughters for nothing more than his own weariness. Therefore, in a sense, all of the conflict (something) arose for no good reason (nothing). So, if the conflict came from nothing, then Lear was wrong in saying “nothing will come of nothing.” On the other hand, in the end of the play, almost every character dies. It is very dismal and void, and most of it was in vain. In a way, the play ends with a feeling that there is nothing, and no one left. If we look at the play this way, from start to finish, Lear is right and nothing really does produce more of nothing.
Another issue raised by the “existence” of “nothing,” is what is implied in speech. Is saying nothing better than saying the word “nothing”? If Cordelia had just remained silent, would Lear have become so outraged? By speaking the word “nothing” then reiterating it when asked for “something,” perhaps Cordelia is perceived to be defiant of her father. If she had simply not said anything, Lear might have been more concerned rather than angry.
We can assume that in certain instances, when a character says “nothing,” they mean quite the opposite. We know that when Cordelia says it in the beginning, she actually means that there is too much to put into words. When Edmund reads the fabricated letter and says “nothing” when asked what he is reading, he actually means “something very important” (or at least it would be if it were true). Even when Lear says that “nothing will come of nothing” we know that, in terms of the plot, something came from nothing then ended up in nothingness.
This issue of “nothing” is reminiscent of Othello, in the fact that both plots end sadly with most of the characters dead, and both conflicts were raised out of what could have very well been nothing at all. In other words, neither tragedy needed to occur; it was merely the work of cruel characters. Speech also plays a big part in both plays; in Othello, Iago uses his speech to manipulate people and get what he wants, as does Edmund (they also both forge letters).
-Eliza Gerland discussion A: Th 2-2:50 F.Wang
Measure for Measure- Act III, Scene ii, Lines 248-270
Duke: “Peace be with you!
He who the sword of heaven will bear
Should be as holy as severe;
Pattern in himself to know,
Grace to stand, and virtue to go;
More nor less to others paying
Than by self-offenses weighing.
Shame to him whose cruel striking
Kills for faults of his own liking.
Twice treble shame on Angelo,
To weed my vice and let his grow.
O, what may man within him hide,
Though angel on the outward side!
How may likeness made in crimes,
Making practice on the times,
To draw with idle spider’s strings
Most ponderous and substantial things?
Craft against vice I must apply;
With Angelo tonight shall lie
His old betrothed, but despised:
So disguise shall by th’ disguised
Pay with falsehood, false exacting,
And perform an old contracting.”
Context: The Duke’s soliloquy closes Act III and details his upcoming plans to frame Angelo. He intends to send Mariana in Isabella’s place, thereby freeing Isabella from soiling her purity and teaching Angelo the fallbacks of scheming hypocrisy.
Theme:
*Political hypocrisy: The dichotomy between proclaimed moral righteousness and action, specifically with respect to political figures such as Angelo, underlies the course of the play. The Duke’s soliloquy accomplishes two things. Firstly, it details plans to set-up Angelo and free Isabella. But most importantly, it furthers the theme of political hypocrisy. The Duke justifies his scheming by proving that Angelo has abandoned the upstanding moral path. He furthers the idea that political figures must adhere to the same standards they enforce (clearly, something Angelo has failed to do). The Duke believes that “he who the sword of heaven will bear/ should be as holy as severe”. Angelo should punish “more nor less to others paying/ than by self-offenses weighing”. A just ruler must inflict no more nor less on others than his own offenses warrant, and Angelo has failed to follow such a standard. Angelo hopes to prove that he can mask corruption while maintaining the façade of an “angel on the outward side”, and the Duke plans to prove him wrong.
Jessica McMillin
Waldo Discussion
Thursday 2:00-2:50
He who the sword of heaven will bear
Should be as holy as severe;
Pattern in himself to know,
Grace to stand, and virtue to go;
More nor less to others paying
Than by self-offenses weighing.
Shame to him whose cruel striking
Kills for faults of his own liking.
Twice treble shame on Angelo,
To weed my vice and let his grow.
O, what may man within him hide,
Though angel on the outward side!
How may likeness made in crimes,
Making practice on the times,
To draw with idle spider’s strings
Most ponderous and substantial things?
Craft against vice I must apply;
With Angelo tonight shall lie
His old betrothed, but despised:
So disguise shall by th’ disguised
Pay with falsehood, false exacting,
And perform an old contracting.”
Context: The Duke’s soliloquy closes Act III and details his upcoming plans to frame Angelo. He intends to send Mariana in Isabella’s place, thereby freeing Isabella from soiling her purity and teaching Angelo the fallbacks of scheming hypocrisy.
Theme:
*Political hypocrisy: The dichotomy between proclaimed moral righteousness and action, specifically with respect to political figures such as Angelo, underlies the course of the play. The Duke’s soliloquy accomplishes two things. Firstly, it details plans to set-up Angelo and free Isabella. But most importantly, it furthers the theme of political hypocrisy. The Duke justifies his scheming by proving that Angelo has abandoned the upstanding moral path. He furthers the idea that political figures must adhere to the same standards they enforce (clearly, something Angelo has failed to do). The Duke believes that “he who the sword of heaven will bear/ should be as holy as severe”. Angelo should punish “more nor less to others paying/ than by self-offenses weighing”. A just ruler must inflict no more nor less on others than his own offenses warrant, and Angelo has failed to follow such a standard. Angelo hopes to prove that he can mask corruption while maintaining the façade of an “angel on the outward side”, and the Duke plans to prove him wrong.
Jessica McMillin
Waldo Discussion
Thursday 2:00-2:50
The vulnerability of the father
King Lear 1:1 (110-118)
“Let it be so. Thy truth then be thy dower.
For by the sacred radiance of the sun,
The mysteries of Hecate and the night,
By all the operation of the orbs
From whom we do exist and cease to be,
Here I disclaim all my paternal care,
Propinquity, and property of blood,
And as a stranger to my heart and me
Hold thee from this for ever.”
Parallels were made in discussion about the role of fathers in Othello and Measure for Measure. The father-daughter relationships in both plays display how vulnerable the father figures turn out to be so as readers we are equivocal about whether to reason with the daughter or the unreasonable fathers. Shakespeare creates father figures that are easy to manipulate and deceive through a false façade of duty and obligation on behalf of the daughters. Goneril and Regan of King Lear are both good with words and can easily fool Lear into believing they love him, however when Cordelia speaks the truth she is disowned for being truly dutiful to her father, and the male superiors like her future husband.
As Barbantio is left alone without a dutiful daughter and he is also made into a foolish character from the beginning of Othello because of the scene he makes blaming Othello of kidnapping and using witchcraft to get Desdemona to marry him. Barbantio is left as the lonely and abandoned father and is moved to the margins of the play because he has no influence of his daughter and cannot protect her no matter what he does to try and annul the wedding between Desdemona and Othello.
As Barbantio is left alone without a dutiful daughter and he is also made into a foolish character from the beginning of Othello because of the scene he makes blaming Othello of kidnapping and using witchcraft to get Desdemona to marry him. Barbantio is left as the lonely and abandoned father and is moved to the margins of the play because he has no influence of his daughter and cannot protect her no matter what he does to try and annul the wedding between Desdemona and Othello.
Measure for Measure III.i
Isab. O, were it but my life,
I'd throw it down for your deliverance
As frankly as a pin [...]
Be ready, Claudio, for your death tomorrow.
Claud. Yes--Has he affections in him
That thus can make him bit the law by the nose
When he would force it? Sure it is no sin;
Or of the deadly seven it is the least.
Isab. Which is the least?
Claud. If it were damnable, he, being so wise,
Why would he for a momentary trick
Be predurably fined?--O Isabel!
Isab. What says my brother?
Claud. Death is a fearful thing.
Isab. And shamed life a hateful.
Claud. Ay, but to die, and go we know not where;
To lie in cold obstruction, and to rot;
This sensible warm motion to become
A kneaded clod; and the delighted spirit
To bathe in fiery floods or to reside
In thrilling regions of thick-ribbed ice;
To be imprison'd in the viewless winds,
And blow with restless violence round about
The pendent world; or to be worse than worst
Of those that lawless or uncertain thoughts
Imagine howling!--'tis too horrible!
The weariest and most loathed worldly life
That age, ache, penury, and imprisonment
Can lay on nature is a paradise
To what we fear of death.
Isab. Alas! alas!
Claud. Sweet sister, let me live:
What sin you do to save a brother's life
Nature dispenses with the deed so far
That it becomes a virtue.
Isab. O you beast! [...]
Thy sin's not accidental, but a trade:
Mercy to thee would prove itself a bawd:
'Tis best that thou diest quickly.
In this exchange between Claudio and Isabel, Shakespeare uses metaphoric language from both in order to create contrasting images of death and morality. Claudio describes death as a "fearful" thing; and Isabel, rather than disputing this, points out that shameful living is "hateful." It soon becomes clear that these two words--and the mutually exclusive relationship between them--help characterize the two viewpoints of life and death: although brother and sister are arguing, they are not in fact disagreeing. Rather, they each choose to elaborate on separate ideas (life vs. death), shaping a distinct landscape for dialogue instead of leading to a victor.
While Claudio initially agrees death is a "sensible warm motion," he paints life as "the delighted spirit" which dying would then cage in "thick-ribbed ice" or drown in "fiery floods." Here, he suggests that life is a spirit or soul rather than the body, for only a spirit could "be imprison'd in the viewless winds"--"and blown": it is physically impossible for something of substance to be jailed by invisible winds. He fears the "howling" of the spirit over the "age, ache, penury, and imprisonment"--all physical ailments--of the living existence. Yet for Isabel, the physical end to life is nothing: "[W]ere it but my life, / I'd throw it down for your deliverance / As frankly as a pin."
Isabel's use of language reverses the image of death and life that Claudio previously created. Instead of relating physical pains (floods, clods, ice) to a spiritual change (death), Isabel turns emotional/internal decisions (morality) into physical burdens (incest): "Wilt thou be made a man out of my vice?" Sin, customarily an internal force or result, is here described as a practical "trade"--something men deal with in their day-to-day, physical existence. In this passage, the contrasting use of language by the arguing characters juxtaposes two inverse relationships between life and death. As a whole, they then demonstrate the corresponding priorities of Claudio and Isabel, helping explain how each has come to lead the life they lead.
Mary Sarkisyan: Discussion Thursday 1:00, Wang
"Good my lord, you have begot me, bred me, loved me. I return those duties back as are right fit, obey you, love you, and most honor you. Why have my sisters husbands if they love you all? Haply, when I shall wed, that lord whose hand must take my plight shall carry half my love with him, half my care and duty. Sure i shall never marry like my sisters, [To love my father all.]"
ACT 1.1 Lines 96-101
Here Cordelia makes an excellent point, and i belive the most honest one. Both of the oher sisters gave the conventional answer to their father and told Lear what he wanted ot hear. But Cordelia refused to make such a speech becuase she felt that her fathers question was illogical considering a woman is supposed to place her huband before everything and everyone else. Cordelia refuses to copy here sisters empty words becuase the sense behind them loving their father more than anything contradicts the fact that they are bethrothed and about to be married. Lear seems to be pushing his pride here and he wants the submission and complete love and respect oh his three daughters. In repsect to the men in these three ladies' lives i would agree that Cordelia is the most noble and honorable one. If the other two men knew that the two sisters love their father more than them they would not be very happy about it. Therefore Cordelia refutes her hgusband by repeating what she has been taught and knows is right...that they man is the head of the woman and that women must repect, love and honor their own husbands, even more so than their father.
ACT 1.1 Lines 96-101
Here Cordelia makes an excellent point, and i belive the most honest one. Both of the oher sisters gave the conventional answer to their father and told Lear what he wanted ot hear. But Cordelia refused to make such a speech becuase she felt that her fathers question was illogical considering a woman is supposed to place her huband before everything and everyone else. Cordelia refuses to copy here sisters empty words becuase the sense behind them loving their father more than anything contradicts the fact that they are bethrothed and about to be married. Lear seems to be pushing his pride here and he wants the submission and complete love and respect oh his three daughters. In repsect to the men in these three ladies' lives i would agree that Cordelia is the most noble and honorable one. If the other two men knew that the two sisters love their father more than them they would not be very happy about it. Therefore Cordelia refutes her hgusband by repeating what she has been taught and knows is right...that they man is the head of the woman and that women must repect, love and honor their own husbands, even more so than their father.
"Othello" Act III scene 3 lines 192-205
Iago (to Othello):
I am glad of this; for now I shall have reason
To show the love and duty that I bear you
With franker spirit. Therefore, as I am bound,
Receive it from me. I speak not yet of proof.
Look to your wife; observe her well with Cassio;
Wear you eyes thus, not jealous nor secure.
I would not have your free and noble nature,
Out of self-bounty, be abused. Look to't.
I know our country disposition well:
In Venice they do not let God see the pranks
They dare not show their husbands; their best conscience
Is not to leave't undone, but keep't unknown.
In this passage Iago tries to convince Othello that Desdemona has been cheating on Othello. This shows a lot about Iago's character and ability to manipulate language. The order in which he speaks and tries to lead Othello’s mind is significant in Othello being convinced. By beginning with "love and duty" Othello rather than Desdemona, Iago makes his thoughts regarding her secondary and his duty to Othello most important. But the language is ambiguous if read closely. Iago says "the love and duty that I bear you" but never says how much that it, introducing the possibility that he bears very little. He then tells Othelllo to receive what Iago is bound to give, but Iago does not feel he owes Othello much or he would not be using him in this way. Iago mocks Othello while simultaneously manipulating him. When Iago speaks of his knowledge of Venetian women’s reputation, he goes a step further in talking down to Othello. Othello is reminded that he is not from the same geographical area as the others. Iago is able to manipulate this to make himself look good and to make Othello worry and feel his otherness. Iago is still asserting his superiority. This passage also shows betrayal and questions the power of military ranks and bonds.
Othello V.2.1 "It is the cause"It is the cause, it is the cause, my soul,
It is the cause, it is the cause, my soul,
Let me not name it to you, you chaste stars!
It is the cause. Yet I'll not shed her blood;
Nor scar that whiter skin of hers than snow,
And smooth as monumental alabaster.
Yet she must die, else she'll betray more men.
Put out the light, and then Put out the light.
If I quench thee, thou naming minister,
I can again thy former light restore,
Should I repent me: but once put out thy light,
Thou cunning'st pattern of excelling nature,
I know not where is that Promethean heat
That can thy light relume.
-Othello V.2.1-13
This soliloquy of Othello’s precedes his murder of Desdemona. Othello opens mid-thought, stating “It is the cause,” though we must supply what he is thinking about. We could see these words as an explanation of why Desdemona, in Othello’s mind has been unfaithful. Also we can see them as a declaration of the cosmic cause for Othello’s unfortunate situation. The following imager involving light and stars supports this reading. Othello also mentions his soul after this statement. We could interpret this as a confession that his soul is in fact the cause of the trouble in the plot. This brings up issues of race and the assumption that Othello’s soul is somehow inferior to that of a white man. In this reading, Othello claims that his inferior soul is the cause for his misfortune. In juxtaposition with the mentioning of “light” so many times, this implication takes on more significance. Othello points out the distance between himself and the “whiter skin of hers than snow” that belongs to Desdemona. By underlining the fact that her skin is so white, he brings his darkness further under speculation. This speech could be seen as a self conscious acknowledgement of his supposed fault in attempting to marry a white woman. It reflects the cultural assumptions of the time that this match is somehow wrong and causes tragedy. In this way the play presents the true tragic flaw of Othello as his blackness, rather than his rash jealousy.
Alyssa Snyder
Discusion 1E
Othello- Race in The Duke's Speech
Duke: “Let it be so./ Good night to everyone. [ To Brabantio] And, noble signor,/ If virtue no delighted beauty lack,/ Your son-in-law is far more fair than black.”
At this time in the story, the duke pardons Othello for stealing Desdemona. Both men then plan Othello’s and his wife’s departure to Cyprus. The Duke turns to Brabantio and tries to help him accept his new son-in-law. The passage contains words that stray away from physical hue and focus on the internal character. The Duke first addresses Brabantio as a “noble signor.”
Nobility addresses a person of a high ranking position and virtues characteristics. The world also described a person associated with good rather evil. The Duke then tells Brabantio that “if virtue no delighted beauty lack.” In this passage, the Duke focuses on the goodness and righteousness that associated with virtue. Virtue, an abstract word, focuses on the internal character of a person rather than the outward appearance. The Duke uses virtue to highlight Othello’s good character rather than his black skin color that appalls Brabantio. The Duke finally stamps Othello as a creature “for more fair than black” at the end of the passage. This action marks Othello’s whitening and illustrates the racism that the Venetians feel toward the Moore. If Othello did not have all the honors that he had accumulated throughout his service to the Venice, the Duke would not have overlooked his skin color. Overall, the Dukes words illustrate a racist Venice whiling to overlook race out of convenience.
At this time in the story, the duke pardons Othello for stealing Desdemona. Both men then plan Othello’s and his wife’s departure to Cyprus. The Duke turns to Brabantio and tries to help him accept his new son-in-law. The passage contains words that stray away from physical hue and focus on the internal character. The Duke first addresses Brabantio as a “noble signor.”
Nobility addresses a person of a high ranking position and virtues characteristics. The world also described a person associated with good rather evil. The Duke then tells Brabantio that “if virtue no delighted beauty lack.” In this passage, the Duke focuses on the goodness and righteousness that associated with virtue. Virtue, an abstract word, focuses on the internal character of a person rather than the outward appearance. The Duke uses virtue to highlight Othello’s good character rather than his black skin color that appalls Brabantio. The Duke finally stamps Othello as a creature “for more fair than black” at the end of the passage. This action marks Othello’s whitening and illustrates the racism that the Venetians feel toward the Moore. If Othello did not have all the honors that he had accumulated throughout his service to the Venice, the Duke would not have overlooked his skin color. Overall, the Dukes words illustrate a racist Venice whiling to overlook race out of convenience.
Othello: Act 1, Scene 3, Lines 168-174
Passage: “These things to hear / Would Desdemona seriously incline. / But still the house affairs would draw her hence, / Which ever as she could with haste dispatch / She’d come again, and with a greedy ear devour up my discourse.”
Context: Othello is explaining how he won over Desdemona.
Significance:
Themes in this passage include a woman’s agency and cultural narratives/discourse.
In regards to a woman’s agency, Desdemona is said to have “with a greedy ear devour[ed]” the stories that Othello would tell. The word “devour” itself suggests the image of an animal, and in this case an animal of prey. In a sense, Desdemona’s ability and desire to know more about Othello reveals her agency as a woman. She is the one preying upon the history of Othello. Furthermore, Desdemona would “seriously incline,” indicating literal action of moving forward. Not only is she “devour[ing]” his discourse, but the action of moving forward indicates that she accepts this discourse as well and is “moving forward” into life with a somewhat different view than that of her society.
By accepting his cultural discourse we move into the ideas of cultural narratives, their creation, and their destruction. For example, Othello’s narratives contain new ideas (be they of race, gender, etc.) while Desdemona’s physical inclining and her extreme desire to know more show someone accepting such ideas. This reveals that even someone as pure and good as Desdemona can accept something new and frightening. The combination of Othello’s stories and Desdemona’s acceptance represents a possible future destruction of current narratives. This can be much more frightening than Othello’s stories, for it questions the validity and the “common sense” aspects of current narratives: what was believed to be true is now simply viewed as an invented lie.
Of course, a few other things must be considered. Othello is explaining Desdemona’s agency through his voice, indicating a lack of voice on Desdemona’s part, which in turn leads to a loss of agency. Furthermore, this idea of devouring narratives is undermined when Emilia says that men use women as food and then “belch” them because the idea of “devouring” people’s narratives is transferred from Desdemona to men in general (3.4.120-123).
Overall, perhaps this reveals the possibility of female agency, but its inability to coexist in the play's current social narratives. One or the other must be destroyed, and in this case it was Desdemona's agency.
Evelia Manzo
Context: Othello is explaining how he won over Desdemona.
Significance:
Themes in this passage include a woman’s agency and cultural narratives/discourse.
In regards to a woman’s agency, Desdemona is said to have “with a greedy ear devour[ed]” the stories that Othello would tell. The word “devour” itself suggests the image of an animal, and in this case an animal of prey. In a sense, Desdemona’s ability and desire to know more about Othello reveals her agency as a woman. She is the one preying upon the history of Othello. Furthermore, Desdemona would “seriously incline,” indicating literal action of moving forward. Not only is she “devour[ing]” his discourse, but the action of moving forward indicates that she accepts this discourse as well and is “moving forward” into life with a somewhat different view than that of her society.
By accepting his cultural discourse we move into the ideas of cultural narratives, their creation, and their destruction. For example, Othello’s narratives contain new ideas (be they of race, gender, etc.) while Desdemona’s physical inclining and her extreme desire to know more show someone accepting such ideas. This reveals that even someone as pure and good as Desdemona can accept something new and frightening. The combination of Othello’s stories and Desdemona’s acceptance represents a possible future destruction of current narratives. This can be much more frightening than Othello’s stories, for it questions the validity and the “common sense” aspects of current narratives: what was believed to be true is now simply viewed as an invented lie.
Of course, a few other things must be considered. Othello is explaining Desdemona’s agency through his voice, indicating a lack of voice on Desdemona’s part, which in turn leads to a loss of agency. Furthermore, this idea of devouring narratives is undermined when Emilia says that men use women as food and then “belch” them because the idea of “devouring” people’s narratives is transferred from Desdemona to men in general (3.4.120-123).
Overall, perhaps this reveals the possibility of female agency, but its inability to coexist in the play's current social narratives. One or the other must be destroyed, and in this case it was Desdemona's agency.
Evelia Manzo
Measure for Measure Act 2, Scene 1 "Scarecrow of the Law"
Angelo, "We must not make a scarecrow of the law, Setting it up to fear the birds of prey. And let it keep one shape, till custom make it, Their perch and not their terror."
Here, when Angelo is talking to Escalus, Shakespeare is criticizing the enforced blanket of law by saying it is not rigid enough in the face of temptation. In essence, Angelo is proclaiming that the law should hold society up instead of break it down. By evoking the concept of "custom," Angelo illustrates that while customs guide Elizabethian society, laws are still needed to maintain order. Angelo establishes that the "birds of prey" of society (the powerful yet not entirely rich or noble men in society) cannot continue to fear the legal system because it is this exact system that legitimized their power and relative hiearchy. After Escalus responds to Angelo's scarecrow analogy, Angelo bites back with a pivotal allusionary line in the play.
"Tis one thing to be tempted, Escalus. Another thing to fall."
In essence, wanting to eat the apple in the Garden of Eden and actually eating the apple are not mutually exclusive. However, in Shakespeare's day, thinking of committing acts of treason, slander, libel and actually committing these acts was thought as one of the same. Thus, 'Measure for Measure' probes whether the reader first, thinks 'considering' and actually 'acting' are equal, and second, to ponder the question of fairness between the realms of our minds and the realms of our actions.
Here, when Angelo is talking to Escalus, Shakespeare is criticizing the enforced blanket of law by saying it is not rigid enough in the face of temptation. In essence, Angelo is proclaiming that the law should hold society up instead of break it down. By evoking the concept of "custom," Angelo illustrates that while customs guide Elizabethian society, laws are still needed to maintain order. Angelo establishes that the "birds of prey" of society (the powerful yet not entirely rich or noble men in society) cannot continue to fear the legal system because it is this exact system that legitimized their power and relative hiearchy. After Escalus responds to Angelo's scarecrow analogy, Angelo bites back with a pivotal allusionary line in the play.
"Tis one thing to be tempted, Escalus. Another thing to fall."
In essence, wanting to eat the apple in the Garden of Eden and actually eating the apple are not mutually exclusive. However, in Shakespeare's day, thinking of committing acts of treason, slander, libel and actually committing these acts was thought as one of the same. Thus, 'Measure for Measure' probes whether the reader first, thinks 'considering' and actually 'acting' are equal, and second, to ponder the question of fairness between the realms of our minds and the realms of our actions.
Othello Act II, Scene I
Lines 375-376 are spoken by Iago in Act II, Scene I, regarding his plot to manipulate Othello into thinking Desdemona is having an affair with Cassio: “Thus do I ever make my fool my purse; For I mine own gained knowledge should profane…”. These two lines are written in perfect iambic pentameter. It is interesting to note that only five lines earlier Iago is conversing with Roderigo in prose and is able to seemingly switch in and out and utilize both metered poetic speech and unregulated prose. This highlights Iago’s two-faced nature and his ability to mask his feelings and create an outward appearance and composure that is completely at odds with his thoughts and emotions.
In addition, lines 375-376 also subtly reveal Iago’s egocentricity and hubris
that eventually lead to his downfall. Iago uses the possessive article and pronoun “I” six times in the two lines. In two lines containing only seventeen words total, over a third of them refer to Iago himself or to a possession of his (“I”, “my”, “mine”, “own”). Such repetition of possessive articles and pronouns alludes to Iago’s narcissism and preoccupation with his own desires. It directly correlates with his actions and motives bring about the downfall of Othello. It is unsettling to note as well that Iago’s true feelings are delivered in metered poetry. Thus, Iago’s manipulative and dangerous nature is exposed as he is able to manipulate and mold without any hesitation his true feelings and self-musings into perfectly metered iambs.
Iago’s use of the word “purse” in line 374 with “Thus do I ever make my fool my purse” also alludes to his multifaceted and cunning nature. While the modern definition of a purse would be “a money bag or receptacle for money and its contents”, alternate definitions include “a person's conscience, heart, etc., regarded as a place of safe storage or supply; a person's thoughts or store of ideas” and “an act of pursing the lips” (Oxford English Dictionary). Thus, Iago’s linguistic ambiguity and manipulation of the word “purse” correlate with his future actions and intent to manipulate not only his physical appearance but in addition his actions and the emotions of others to both deceive and fulfill his own desires.
In addition, lines 375-376 also subtly reveal Iago’s egocentricity and hubris
that eventually lead to his downfall. Iago uses the possessive article and pronoun “I” six times in the two lines. In two lines containing only seventeen words total, over a third of them refer to Iago himself or to a possession of his (“I”, “my”, “mine”, “own”). Such repetition of possessive articles and pronouns alludes to Iago’s narcissism and preoccupation with his own desires. It directly correlates with his actions and motives bring about the downfall of Othello. It is unsettling to note as well that Iago’s true feelings are delivered in metered poetry. Thus, Iago’s manipulative and dangerous nature is exposed as he is able to manipulate and mold without any hesitation his true feelings and self-musings into perfectly metered iambs.
Iago’s use of the word “purse” in line 374 with “Thus do I ever make my fool my purse” also alludes to his multifaceted and cunning nature. While the modern definition of a purse would be “a money bag or receptacle for money and its contents”, alternate definitions include “a person's conscience, heart, etc., regarded as a place of safe storage or supply; a person's thoughts or store of ideas” and “an act of pursing the lips” (Oxford English Dictionary). Thus, Iago’s linguistic ambiguity and manipulation of the word “purse” correlate with his future actions and intent to manipulate not only his physical appearance but in addition his actions and the emotions of others to both deceive and fulfill his own desires.
"And I - God bless the mark! - his Moorship's ancient." Othello, I.I, line 32
This is the first thing that the reader hears about Othello. Iago is mocking Othello by making a comment on his race. This introduces Othello being looked down upon because of his race. Even Othello, himself, thinks he is a lower class citizen and because of his race he is not as good as the other characters in the story, many of his insecurities are based in his race. Along with the issue of race, Iago calling Othello a Moor also starts the mocking tone and attitude that Iago has. He is constantly mocking the other characters in the play, and places them in different categories. By doing this he not only shows how he feels towards everyone else, but Iago creates a shared point of view with the audience. By placing Othello in the category of a Moor, people begin to see him in terms of "is he one of us, or one of them?" Shakespeare creates linguistic categories when Iago mocks the characters in this way. Iago's habit of mocking others also raises a red flag about his character and the kind of person that he is.
Sharya de Silva
Sharya de Silva
Othello: "A black ram is tupping your white ewe"
The contrast of light and dark remains constant throughout the text. What I find very interesting about Iago's speech is its effect on the king. The notion of light and dark has not only been depicted as two extremes, but also as enemies. Without addressing the term "tupping," the king, as well as the typical reader, has already made an association with light being somehow overpowered by darkness/blackness. The idea of dark being associated with evil, wrongdoing, untrustworthiness, is continually perpertuated throughout literature. Acknowledging this fact, we realize the effect of the speech is that as it seems to address preconceived beliefs that gives the excerpt its power.
I think it is important to acknowledge the animal imagery here: this imagery hints at another theme that runs through the text, the animal equated with the moor rendering him lascivious. Black and White is important, here, because it is an attempt to simplify for a moment the otherwise complicated identity of the Moor; his christianity vs. other-ness, his blackness vs. whiteness, his position of power vs. the powerlessness in the matter of his race (he didn't choose it). Further: the mention of black and white lends itself to a dramatic interpretation. How are Black and White staged?
Back to the topic of animal imagery: The animal imagery in this play opens itself to comparison to other animal imagery that we have discussed in lecture, namely the notion that Edmund was bred into the world. Premarital sex, then, also comes into question and likewise the issue of marriage in general. This topic offers many avenues of discussion.
I think it is important to acknowledge the animal imagery here: this imagery hints at another theme that runs through the text, the animal equated with the moor rendering him lascivious. Black and White is important, here, because it is an attempt to simplify for a moment the otherwise complicated identity of the Moor; his christianity vs. other-ness, his blackness vs. whiteness, his position of power vs. the powerlessness in the matter of his race (he didn't choose it). Further: the mention of black and white lends itself to a dramatic interpretation. How are Black and White staged?
Back to the topic of animal imagery: The animal imagery in this play opens itself to comparison to other animal imagery that we have discussed in lecture, namely the notion that Edmund was bred into the world. Premarital sex, then, also comes into question and likewise the issue of marriage in general. This topic offers many avenues of discussion.
Sunday, May 4, 2008
King Lear II.4.264-273
Context: Goneril and Regan are trying to convince Lear that he doesn't need any knights.
As one can tell from the very beginning of the play that King Lear is a flawed character. Although the initial judgment of Lear seems to make his rashness his ultimate flaw, this passage reveals Lear's true flaw, and ironically, he recognizes it picks the wrong solution. Lear's true flaw is putting value in appearance or/and superfluous things. There is no reason for Lear to keep his knights besides to show-off to people that he still have some authority. He argues that "Our basest beggars / Are in the poorest thing superfluous," that even beggars have things that they don't need. He continues saying that if people are reduced to live only according to their needs, they will be no different from animals. This moment reveals that Lear is no fool. His ability to conceptualize such argument hardly proves Lear as a rash being. The irony is that he understands his need for superfluous things, which is also an irony in itself. And then of all the virtues there are, he asks for patience. For a man who values more superfluous things than anything else, what he truly needs is humility. Patience is no solution to Lear's problem. By having value in appearance or superfluous things reflect Lear's authority, which gives way to pride, and it is pride that throws Lear into madness.
-Alex Lai
As one can tell from the very beginning of the play that King Lear is a flawed character. Although the initial judgment of Lear seems to make his rashness his ultimate flaw, this passage reveals Lear's true flaw, and ironically, he recognizes it picks the wrong solution. Lear's true flaw is putting value in appearance or/and superfluous things. There is no reason for Lear to keep his knights besides to show-off to people that he still have some authority. He argues that "Our basest beggars / Are in the poorest thing superfluous," that even beggars have things that they don't need. He continues saying that if people are reduced to live only according to their needs, they will be no different from animals. This moment reveals that Lear is no fool. His ability to conceptualize such argument hardly proves Lear as a rash being. The irony is that he understands his need for superfluous things, which is also an irony in itself. And then of all the virtues there are, he asks for patience. For a man who values more superfluous things than anything else, what he truly needs is humility. Patience is no solution to Lear's problem. By having value in appearance or superfluous things reflect Lear's authority, which gives way to pride, and it is pride that throws Lear into madness.
-Alex Lai
Othello's Last Words
Then must you speak
Of one that loved not wisely but too well,
Of one not easily jealous but, being wrought,
Perplexed in the extreme; of one whose hand,
Like the base Indian, threw a pearl away
Richer than all his tribe; of one whose subdued eyes,
Albeit unused to the melting mood,
Drop tears as fast as the Arabian trees
Their medicinable gum. Set you down this,
And say besides that in Aleppo once,
Where a malignant and a turbaned Turk
Beat a Venetian and traduced the state,
I took by th’ throat the circumcised dog
And smote him thus. (V.ii.352–365)
Othello's Final address is a brilliantly complicated passage. With these final words, Othello takes his life, reaffirming his position as a figure estranged from Venetian society, yet bound by it and the social expectations thrust upon him. His speech is both eloquent and troubled; confused and strangely resolute. Again, we see Othello's mastery of story-telling and ability to take his listeners away from the present moment, presenting images of 'Arabian trees' and 'turbaned Turks[s]'.
In this light, we are presented with an illustration of his love, longing, and loss of Desdemona - a figure whom he refers to as a 'pearl' thrown away. His regret for part actions, as well as self-loathing are more than evident here. He reflects on his military status and reminds the audience of his troubled past and similarly difficult climb up the rungs of a society that sees him as a lesser man.
The final image is both vivid and pitiful as he calls himself a circumcised dog before stabbing himself in the chest.
Dan Gaita
Of one that loved not wisely but too well,
Of one not easily jealous but, being wrought,
Perplexed in the extreme; of one whose hand,
Like the base Indian, threw a pearl away
Richer than all his tribe; of one whose subdued eyes,
Albeit unused to the melting mood,
Drop tears as fast as the Arabian trees
Their medicinable gum. Set you down this,
And say besides that in Aleppo once,
Where a malignant and a turbaned Turk
Beat a Venetian and traduced the state,
I took by th’ throat the circumcised dog
And smote him thus. (V.ii.352–365)
Othello's Final address is a brilliantly complicated passage. With these final words, Othello takes his life, reaffirming his position as a figure estranged from Venetian society, yet bound by it and the social expectations thrust upon him. His speech is both eloquent and troubled; confused and strangely resolute. Again, we see Othello's mastery of story-telling and ability to take his listeners away from the present moment, presenting images of 'Arabian trees' and 'turbaned Turks[s]'.
In this light, we are presented with an illustration of his love, longing, and loss of Desdemona - a figure whom he refers to as a 'pearl' thrown away. His regret for part actions, as well as self-loathing are more than evident here. He reflects on his military status and reminds the audience of his troubled past and similarly difficult climb up the rungs of a society that sees him as a lesser man.
The final image is both vivid and pitiful as he calls himself a circumcised dog before stabbing himself in the chest.
Dan Gaita
II.i.47-50; Elbow misspeaking
"If it please your honor, I am the poor Duke's constable, and my name is Elbow. I do lean upon justice, sir, and do bring in here before your good honor two notorious benefactors."
This passage embodies the flawed speech of Elbow’s character. First, Elbow says, “I am the poor Duke’s constable.” This comment confuses who Elbow suggests is “poor.” In one way, he may be saying that he is the poor constable of the Duke but what he actually says is that the Duke, himself, is poor. Later, he substitutes the word malefactor for benefactor. After he is corrected by Angelo, he does not seem to be aware of his mistake or does not care that he has misspoken. This idea of substituting the incorrect word for the correct one is called a malapropism and is used extensively by Elbow and Pompey throughout Measure for Measure. Also, Elbow’s flawed speech seems to be parodying the legal process because words begin to lose meaning. The fact that he cannot seem to speak what he means touches upon Shakespeare’s ideas regarding speech. In many ways, Measure for Measure is a play about rhetorical power. When characters are able to find their public voice, they are saved from tragedy. Using Elbow’s character, Shakespeare shows the opposite side of this idea. Because of the fact that Elbow cannot achieve linguistic cunning, he does not reach a respectable position within the world of the play.
This passage embodies the flawed speech of Elbow’s character. First, Elbow says, “I am the poor Duke’s constable.” This comment confuses who Elbow suggests is “poor.” In one way, he may be saying that he is the poor constable of the Duke but what he actually says is that the Duke, himself, is poor. Later, he substitutes the word malefactor for benefactor. After he is corrected by Angelo, he does not seem to be aware of his mistake or does not care that he has misspoken. This idea of substituting the incorrect word for the correct one is called a malapropism and is used extensively by Elbow and Pompey throughout Measure for Measure. Also, Elbow’s flawed speech seems to be parodying the legal process because words begin to lose meaning. The fact that he cannot seem to speak what he means touches upon Shakespeare’s ideas regarding speech. In many ways, Measure for Measure is a play about rhetorical power. When characters are able to find their public voice, they are saved from tragedy. Using Elbow’s character, Shakespeare shows the opposite side of this idea. Because of the fact that Elbow cannot achieve linguistic cunning, he does not reach a respectable position within the world of the play.
Othello I.ii.31-32
Here are some scattered thoughts on this short but significant passage.
"Othello: My parts, my title, and my perfect soul/ Shall manifest me rightly..."
This passage is in the beginning of the play where Iago is telling Othello to go inside because Brabantio's men are coming to get him for stealing his daughter. The passage is symbolic because Othello refuses to go inside claiming that his abilities and clear conscience will make his case. The passage plays with the theme of honor and reputation and masculinity. Othello refuses to run but rather chooses to face the ordeal. This shows his masculinity as he chooses to face what's coming to him instead of running and hiding. He relies on his military reputation to set things right. He is a successful captain and assumes that because of his clean slate in the military, he will be able to clear his name with Brabantio as well. He believes he has done nothing wrong and has a clear conscience as Desdemona went to him willingly (as we later find out)and that his rank makes him worthy of such a woman.
The theme of reputation remains strong throughout the play as Othello deals with the risk of looking like a cuckold when he thinks Desdemona is cheating on him.
Cassio also loses his good reputation when he gets drunk and stabs a man and further loses his rank.
The theme of reputation also runs in Shakespear's other plays such as in Measure for Measure where we have the Duke going away and having Angelo do the dirty work of enforcing unenforced laws as he does not want to have the reputation of being a tyrannical leader.
In Much Ado about Nothing the whole story line runs along the tainting of Hero's reputation.
It must be noted that for men, reputation was an issue of masculinity and military performance and honesty and politics and so forth. On the other hand, for women, the single most important factor of her reputation was her virtue. An obedient woman was one that kept her virtue and listened to her father and then gave her virtue to the man her father approved of as her husband. In Desdemona's case her father did not choose her husband, but it is almost a variation of the same concept. Thus, we can see that even gender plays a key role in reputation.
(Armineh Dereghishian)
"Othello: My parts, my title, and my perfect soul/ Shall manifest me rightly..."
This passage is in the beginning of the play where Iago is telling Othello to go inside because Brabantio's men are coming to get him for stealing his daughter. The passage is symbolic because Othello refuses to go inside claiming that his abilities and clear conscience will make his case. The passage plays with the theme of honor and reputation and masculinity. Othello refuses to run but rather chooses to face the ordeal. This shows his masculinity as he chooses to face what's coming to him instead of running and hiding. He relies on his military reputation to set things right. He is a successful captain and assumes that because of his clean slate in the military, he will be able to clear his name with Brabantio as well. He believes he has done nothing wrong and has a clear conscience as Desdemona went to him willingly (as we later find out)and that his rank makes him worthy of such a woman.
The theme of reputation remains strong throughout the play as Othello deals with the risk of looking like a cuckold when he thinks Desdemona is cheating on him.
Cassio also loses his good reputation when he gets drunk and stabs a man and further loses his rank.
The theme of reputation also runs in Shakespear's other plays such as in Measure for Measure where we have the Duke going away and having Angelo do the dirty work of enforcing unenforced laws as he does not want to have the reputation of being a tyrannical leader.
In Much Ado about Nothing the whole story line runs along the tainting of Hero's reputation.
It must be noted that for men, reputation was an issue of masculinity and military performance and honesty and politics and so forth. On the other hand, for women, the single most important factor of her reputation was her virtue. An obedient woman was one that kept her virtue and listened to her father and then gave her virtue to the man her father approved of as her husband. In Desdemona's case her father did not choose her husband, but it is almost a variation of the same concept. Thus, we can see that even gender plays a key role in reputation.
(Armineh Dereghishian)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)