What does this play suggest about human nature and revenge? In other words, what do various characters’ actions suggest about human beings’ desire to seek revenge and their ability to overcome this desire?

The Tempest is unlike many of Shakespeare’s other works. The play initially seems as a tragedy, because revenge was the protagonist’s main goal.  Shakespeare includes several themes such as the art of magic, romantic love, and most importantly, forgiveness.  Old wounds are not avenged but forgiven.  All of the main characters in this play had past encounters and knew each other for years. Prospero is an aged, educated, and wise man. He proves to us that humanity has the ability of overcoming the desire for revenge with knowledge.  Prospero chooses to not enact his revenge. Throughout the play he decides to act on reason. He is not ambitious like Antonio, and he shows control over his instincts, unlike Caliban. These differences are what set Prospero apart to give him the ability to forgive others.

Prospero, after being banished from Milan and almost killed by his brother Antonio, has lain dormant on the stranded island for over twelve years. Prospero still managed to gain more knowledge and wisdom over this period of time with the magical books and the new tough way of life that he has. But then, after such a long time, he realizes that his wrongdoers are within grasp, all close by. He could have simply killed all of them with any of the magical methods that he disposes.  However, he decides to spare them, and make them repent for their sins face to face. Then he forgives them and allows them to go back to Italy.  Prospero confesses to Ariel that he is only able to pardon his enemies by letting overcome his “Nobler reason ‘gainst [his] fury” (Act V, Scene i, 26). His nobler reason allows him to get out of the primitive state of nature.

Prospero forgives all of his wrongdoers. He is also kind to Caliban and forgave him to an extent by simply punishing him justly. He did not act as an angry father that wants to mutilate his daughter’s assailer and own attempted murderer. Prospero reconciles with all of the Italian men, except Antonio. He forgives his brother up to a certain extent: “For you, most wicked sir, whom to call brother/Would even infect my mouth, I do forgive” (Act 5. Scene i. 130-132). There is noticeably less reconciliation with his brother, due to Antonio showing no remorse and whose betrayal embittered the most and the longest. This helps the audience understand how forgiveness can be a hard choice that is not easily bestowed. But Prospero is able to overcome his desire for revenge.

Antonio is not able to overcome his desire for revenge because he is blinded by ambition. He seems very uninterested in Prospero’s forgiveness and friendship. The last scene presents him as remaining silent and possibly scheming again to retake Prospero’s throne when back in Milan, unlike Alonso kneeling for pardon. But Antonio could be well considered an educated person, as he has lived in a civilized world and ruled in the place of Prospero.  However, the main difference between the two brothers is that Antonio shows no interest in the pursuit of knowledge. This is a limitation to his capability of forgiveness, as he is blinded by ambition. His main concern is to obtain the throne to be in power.  Antonio is motivated by envy and desire, instead of wisdom. Prospero, instead, wants the throne because it is rightfully his.

Shakespeare is portraying that humans, by nature, are revengeful creatures. Another major character that can be considered is Caliban, who is the total opposite of Prospero. Caliban is not able to overcome his desire for revenge over Prospero because he is a primitive being, and bases his actions upon his instincts. He is described as one of the wildest beings and is defined as “A Thing most Brutish”(Act I, Scene ii, 428), by Miranda .  The amount of knowledge other than basic survival skills that he has is non-existent, nor does he show any interest in learning, just like Antonio. All that Caliban has are basic survival techniques on the stranded island. Before Prospero’s arrival to the island, Caliban has no mannerisms and language. Furthermore, he has no sense of right and wrong, even after being under Prospero’s servitude.  He makes decisions based on his natural instincts. Based on those instincts, he almost committed two atrocious deeds.  First, in an expression of his natural instincts, he tried to ravage Miranda. This jest is based off his basic biological urge, and he does not have the rationale to think through and fully understand what people and events surrounding him are doing.  The second deed Caliban almost commits is the murder of Prospero. He believes that Prospero has been mistreating him out of mere spite, so he wants to obtain revenge to gain his island back. The urge to get back at Prospero and kill him can also be considered a decision made by natural instinct, just like his biological urge with Miranda. He meets Trinculo and Stephano, which quickly regards him as his new master. Caliban automatically trusts the two new drunken men that he meets. He then moves on to try and kill Prospero with the two men.  Caliban reacts to his surrounding in the same way that an animal does.

The way that Prospero has treated his traitors and attempted murderers, clearly shows the goodness in him. It is clear that Prospero is just and fair. His character traits come from the wisdom and knowledge obtained over the years, as he is able to rationally think and avoid tragedy. In their initial state of nature, humans are revengeful creatures. But what sets an individual apart is education and wisdom. They enable an individual to act out of reason and avoid tragedy. The ability to forgive, and in some cases to reconcile, is achieved with Prospero.

• Select one of Henry’s speeches that you think is particularly effective, and analyze one or more of the elements that make it so successful. Analyze the text itself, not a performance. In your analysis, you could consider his audience as you explore one or more of his methods of accomplishing his purpose.

One of the most effective speeches that Henry delivers is the response given to the French messenger sent by the Dauphin, with a crate of tennis balls.  Henry’s goal is to prove to his audience, all the major representatives of the British kingdom and the French ambassador, that he had become a strong, wise, scholarly, humble and religious king and not remained frivolous and petty like he once was. He wants to look impressive and portray to everyone that he has transformed into a great king.  The members present at the court are most of his English nobility, his uncle Exeter, the Earl of Westmoreland, the Bishop of Canterbury and the Dauphin, with the eyes and ears of his messengers.  Henry has recently come on the throne. His followers in court and military may still doubt his skills as a young and unexperienced king.  Henry’s actual intention from a previous play was to seem wild, just so he could look more impressive once transformed.

A gift to a foreign ruler is considered to be a sign of respect. But the tennis balls are worthless and are considered to be a major insult to Henry. They suggest that he should return to playing tennis, instead of pretending to be a real king.  This gest is even more insulting, because it does not only refer to his inexperience, but also to his wilder days of gambling, drinking and fornication as a youth before he came to the throne.  The Dauphin believes that tennis would be better suited for the English king, rather than matters of the State.

Figure 1 – Uncle Exeter examining the tennis balls gifted by the Dauphin.

Henry responds by expressing with rhetoric, from the very beginning of his speech, his divine right to rule and sovereignty.  As he speaks, he radiates confidence and immense command.  Henry takes the Dauphin’s joke seriously, but does not completely use it as the main cause for war.  He tries to build a case and raise credibility for justifying his way to the French throne through God’s will, the Church’s complicated reasoning through the French misinterpretation of the Salic law and blaming the Dauphin for all the horrible things that will happen to France in the war.

The reader already knows that Henry has decided to go to war against France before the messengers walked in the room.  He established that there is already a legitimate cause to invade because of the Salic law not being interpreted properly by the French. The Bishop of Canterbury mentioned that the law was only valid in the Germanic lands and that not even the French respected it in their own lands. It was only being used as an excuse to not let Henry make the claim.  Henry states:

“ Now we are well resolved, and by God’s Help

And yours, the noble sinews of our power,

France being ours, we’ll bend it to our awe

Or break it all to pieces.. “(I.ii.223-226 ).

One can understand that there is full intention by Henry to invade.  Furthermore, he had also established and agreed with his nobles about the invasion. They all agreed on having three quarters of the army stay home and protect England against the Scots, and lead the remaining quarter into France.  But he still gives the Dauphin a chance to answer his claim in a peaceful manner, so he may seem merciful and wise.

His main strategy to this speech is to turn the Dauphin’s joke against him and use it as a metaphor.  First, respectfully and cordially with great sarcasm, Henry gives his thanks to the messenger for the gift and his travel pains. Then he goes on to treat France like a tennis court, the war as the game and the Dauphin’s father’s crown as the winner’s prize.

“When we have matched our rackets to these balls,

We will in France, by God’s grace, play a set

Shall strike his father’s crown into the hazard”  (I.ii.261–263)

Henry makes mention that he totally understands the Dauphins reference to his wilder days. But the French heir to the throne did not consider how useful those days were for Henry.  He said that he never considered the throne of England before becoming king. But he will surely be a great king and shine in front of all the subjects once he will be seating on the throne of France.  This implies that he will win the war and gain the throne of France. It is showing a bit of arrogance on Henry’s part.

“We never valued this poor seat of England;

And therefore, living hence, did give ourself

To barbarous license; as ‘tis ever common

That men are merriest when they are from home.

But tell the Dauphin I will keep my state,

Be like a king and show my sail of greatness

When I do rouse me in my throne of France..” (I.ii. 270-276)

He is very skillful at using the metaphor by insinuating that the Dauphin provoked the war.  Henry does well by assigning the responsibility for his actions onto his enemies, rather than himself.  Whatever Henry will do in France during the war and all the evils that will occur, is because it is the Dauphin’s fault and blame: “Tell the pleasant prince this mock of his/ hath turned his balls to gunstones” (I.ii.283). And that is will be on the Dauphin’s conscience the responsibility of the deaths that will occur:

“..And [the Dauphin’s] soul

shall stand sore charged for the wasteful vengeance

That shall fly with them; for many a thousand widows

Shall this mock mock out of their dear husbands

Mock mothers from their sons, mock castles down;

And some are yet ungotten and unborn

That shall have cause to curse the Dauphin’s scorn.” (i.ii.283-289).

Henry uses the word mock as a pun multiple times to simulate the hitting of a tennis ball with a racket.  The first mock, at line 286, is a noun and the second mock is a verb. But it sounds like the striking of a tennis ball. This figure of speech is considered to be onomatopoeia. Furthermore, at line 287, mock mothers from their sons can be considered alliteration. Mock and mothers are two repetitions of initial sounds. Alliteration slows a speaker down, so the listener would have more time to think about what is being said.  Another alliteration in the text is on line 289. The words ‘cause to curse the Dauphin’s scorn’ are also alliteration because of the similar sounds to the words that include the letter c. It slows the reader down in this case to fully imagine the destruction and imagery going on.  Henry appeals to a lot of imagery. He describes a peaceful country that will be all destroyed. He tries to give vision to what will happen to France through his wasteful vengeance.  Henry is portraying the French blood and grief.  The gunstones and toppled castles give a vivid image of the destruction.

King Henry regains his regal composure at the end, by stating that it is God’s will. He has no other choice on how to act because he is God’s instrument. He makes himself appear humble by claiming that God gave him the throne.  He states that his enemies are evil and that they are the cause for all the negative events that happen during the war. He initially appeared arrogant, but by stating that he is under God’s will, he is constructing a believable claim to the throne of France. The events such as the war and gaining the throne of France are meant to happen; he is the rightful heir fighting for a rightful cause:

“But this lies all within the will of God,

to whom I do appeal, and in who name,

Tell you the Dauphin, I am coming on

to venge me as I may, and to put forth

my rightful hand in a well-hallowed cause. “ (I.ii.290-294)

This speech can be considered a model for all the successive speeches that Henry will give to his men. All of their actions are backed by God himself.  Before the battle, he would have his men praying in silence.  He is never sure when God blesses him or not, but when a positive event happens, such as the unbelievable victory at Agincourt, he believes that God fought for him, his cause and his men.  This could greatly hint that the present monarch is on the throne due to a divine right.

Works Cited:

Mabillard, Amanda. Henry V. Shakespeare Online. 20 Aug. 2000. (10/6/2015) http://www.shakespeare-online.com/sources/henryvsources.html

SparkNotes Editors. “SparkNote on Henry V.” SparkNotes.com. SparkNotes LLC. 2003. Web. 6 Oct. 2015.

Shakespeare’s Reading. Miola Robert. Oxford University Press. 2000. Page 54

Images:

Figure 1 was taken from: http://teachers.bergencatholic.org/faculty/hornerj/literature3h/screen%20shots%20henry%20v/tennisballs.jpg

Write your analysis of what was particularly effective and/or ineffective about the performance of one of Shakespeare’s plays.

Recently, I had the opportunity to witness the portrayal of one of Shakespeare’s most popular stage works, the comedy A Midsummer Night’s Dream, at the American Shakespeare Center (ASC) in Staunton, VA.  The director was Mr. Ralph Cohen that led a cast of twelve actors.  Mr. Cohen’s production did an excellent job at entertaining the spectators and allowing them to exercise the joy of imagination. The play continually engages the audience to effortlessly imagine. It lasted exactly two hours and thirty minutes.

The playhouse was mainly constructed with wood and indoor.  The stage was simple, without any elaborate sets or objects to represent the location or environment of the ongoing act. The minimal staging helped speed transitions between scenes, kept the story moving and further facilitated the process of imagination of the crowd. Someone would need to imagine a large dense forest or Theseus’ castle as the act progressed.  Drapery in the background was present for the actors to enter and exit the scene, with two additional doors on each side.  The actors and the audience also shared the same light. Music and sounds, if not played on stage, were played behind the curtains, not visible to the audience. The spectator body was mainly composed preponderantly of young students and parents with their respective children.

At the very start, the announcer spoke a mixture of Early Modern and Modern English to arouse amusement within the crowd.  He exhorted everyone to turn off cellphones, something that never happened in Shakespeare’s time. He also used words such as “Hashtag” (#), which is a label used in social networks, to indicate respect and appropriate silence among the viewers present.  Some of the students were sitting on stools on the sides of the stage, and often interacted with the actor.

As soon as the play commenced, the first noticeable difference, between the original Shakespearean version and ASC’s physical representation, was the modern fashion clothing.  The modern garments allowed better comprehending about each individual’s personality and role.  Also, the young audience could relate more easily to each performer and identify the actors with someone they would already know, using imagination.

Theseus walks on the stage wearing a red coat, very similar to the 2011 royal wedding dress of the current Duke of Cambridge, Prince William, future heir to the throne of England. He appears to be truly majestic and the atmosphere of the stage can be easily associated with the true royal wedding that happened a few years ago in England. Hippolyta, his soon to be wife, wears a green simple dress to show that she is still an exotic Amazon fighter.  The lovers, instead, all wore something similar. The males had a suit and tie and the females wore dresses.  They could easily be associated with any adults in their late 20s wanting to find and keep a relationship.  However, these correlations are different for each spectator, as each person has a different imagination.

Another character that is worth mentioning is Nick Bottom.  He only wore a partial donkey mask at the ASC play. The donkey head only had the two ears, without the nose, showing the full actor’s face.  But Puck’s magic and Titiana’s comments on his long nose rendered thoroughly the idea that his face was indeed like a donkey’s.

Furthermore, the play within the play near the end of the wedding was a great representation of the good entertainment that this play portrayed and the need of imagination to make it great. The actors managed to arouse much laughter among the spectators with Bottom’s prolonged and funny suicide as Pyramus. The craftsmen’s play within the play, in Act V, is there to represent the story of the lovers in the previous four acts.  But the craftsmen, not the authors, did such a poor job at acting, that it required imagination from the audience to distinguish reality and fiction of the play. The craftsmen’s play was as good as anybody imagined it.

With imagination, anything is as good as one makes it. Even with the terrible acting in the play within the play, they were moving the play because of imagination. The audience imagined that the actors were a real wall, a real lion and a true suicide that actually happened. Bottom and the other actors were able to inspire love and sympathy.

I highly encourage you all to attend this representation of A Midsummer Night’s Dream at the American Shakespeare Center.  It has been a wonderful first time experience.

Help Received:

Used some ideas that I have wrote in my Short Paper of A Midsummer Night’s Dream, earlier during the semester.  I used my Short Paper analysis to proper compare the play that I have seen at the ASC and the play that I have read.

Looking particularly at the last act, what do you think the play is suggesting about the role and potential of the imagination in human relationships and/or in the theater?

The last part of A Midsummer Night’s Dream, Act V, presents views about how imagination can go influence human relationships. Any character, with the right amount of imagination, can fall in love irrationally with all sorts of characters. Two of the protagonists, Lysander and Demetrius battle each other for the right woman, either Hermia or Helena, which are very similar, if not twins, like Shakespeare would like to portray them. And also Titania, queen of fairies, fell in love with a fool with a donkey head.

Imagination is not just about falling in love irrationally. It is also believing in worlds that do not exist. Shakespeare, in the last act, brings in the characters that represent the fantastical world of magic and imagination and allows them to talk to the audience as if they were actual fairies and actors at the same time.

The craftsmen’s play within the play, in Act V, is there to represent, in a condensed form, the story of the lovers in the previous four acts.  But the craftsmen did such a poor job at acting, that it required imagination from the audience to distinguish reality and fiction of the play. The craftsmen’s play was as good as anybody imagined it.

Theseus, as he enters court with his newly wed wife, begins by saying that he will “never may believe these antique fables nor these fairy toys” (V.i.1-2). Theseus represents rationality and is not so romantic. He compares lovers to mad men because they hallucinate and see things that others cannot understand. Shakespeare at this point refers explicitly with Theseus’ words to his own class of people, the poets. They confuse people by writing about things that do not exist. Because of the overactive imagination, people see supernatural things such as devils or fairies.  Theseus also mentions lovers, and how they can view something so absurd and fall in love with it.  “The lunatic, the lover, and the poet

Are of imagination all compact. (V.i.8-9). Imagination is what causes all of us to fall in love, Shakespeare explains through his play. Reality is as real as you make it. Theseus mentions that if someone would be scared at night, then they’d imagine a bear come to life! There is irony as Theseus speaks these words, because of all that happened with the lovers and the fairies being present at his very court later on, when he goes to bed.

Hippolyta instead, has a view which is opposite of Theseus’. She replies to her husband by saying:

“But all the story of the night told over,

And all their minds transfigured so together,

More witnesseth than fancy’s images

And grows to something of great constancy,

But, howsoever, strange and admirable.”  (V.i.23-27)

Hippolyta mentions that the story is being told by all the protagonists in the same way, how they all heard and experienced the same events. She believes that the story may be strange, but definitely true. She believes that there is more than fantasies going on.

Imagination can cause danger to human relationships, because one can be so irrational.  One can notice that in the play, Demetrius and Lysander have very similar characteristics and are easily mistaken for one another in the play; even Helena and Hermia are not so distinctive. Each lover is no better than the other. Yet at the start of the play, Aegeus wants Hermia to marry Demetrius and not Lysander. Demetrius only loves Hermia. Hermia loves only Lysander. All the protagonists have a hard time trying to achieve what they truly desire, which is being with their desired partner and making the relationship work. The message portrayed is that love is solemnly based on imagination and irrationality. Lovers are divorced from reason. But in the end, a balance is achieved, through Puck and the fairy’s love potion. And the comic side of the play gives a feeling that everyone will live happily ever after the play within the play, in Act V, with the tragicomic love story, helps achieve a state of happiness and relaxation. The story of Pyramus and Thisbe ends in a tragedy, but all of the confusion between the lovers greatly resembles what happened in the first four acts.

Another way that imagination can facilitate human relationships, other than falling in love, is explained through the play within the play.  Theseus accepts the craftsmen to act at his wedding, surprising Philostrate and Hippolyta, because of how awful the men were at acting.  Nick Bottom thought of himself as the best actor in circulation, not actually realizing how awful he was. The craftsmen went on with their play and were often forgetting lines or being out of tempo. But Theseus states: “If we imagine no worse of them than they of themselves, they may pass for excellent men. Here come two noble beasts in, a man and a lion” (V.i.214-218).

So once again, with imagination, anything is as good as one makes it. Even with the terrible acting, they were moving the play because of imagination. The audience imagined that the actors were either a real wall, a real lion and a true suicide that actually happened. Bottom and the other actors were able to inspire love and sympathy.

In the final part of the act, enter Puck and the members of the fairy realm such as the King and Queen. He goes on saying that there is a harsh world out there:

“Now the hungry lion roars

And the wolf behowls the moon,

Whilst the heavy ploughman snores,

All with weary task fordone.

Now the wasted brands do glow,

Whilst the screech-owl, screeching loud,

Puts the wretch that lies in woe

In remembrance of a shroud.

Now it is the time of night

That the graves all gaping wide,

Every one lets forth his sprite,

In the churchway paths to glide.

And we fairies, that do run

By the triple Hecate’s team

From the presence of the sun,

Following darkness like a dream,

Now are frolic. Not a mouse

Shall disturb this hallowed house.

I am sent with broom before

To sweep the dust behind the door.” (V.i.363-383)

Puck begins by describing a very harsh and scary world as soon as everybody else goes to bed. Wolves howl, lions roar, owls hoot, spirits come out of grave to cause mishap in the world.  And the only way out of these severities is through imagination. Theseus talked about how lunatics become scared at night, and imagine a bear coming to life. But in this case, it works the other way around. One needs to imagine that it is all just a dream.

It is amazing how, after Theseus’ discussion on how he does not believe the stories about the lovers and the fairies, the fairies themselves enter the stage and have the final words in the play.

There is the final quote by Puck, which states:

“If we shadows have offended,

Think but this, and all is mended—

That you have but slumbered here

While these visions did appear.

And this weak and idle theme,

No more yielding but a dream,

Gentles, do not reprehend.

If you pardon, we will mend.

And, as I am an honest Puck,

If we have unearnèd luck

Now to ’scape the serpent’s tongue,

We will make amends ere long.

Else the Puck a liar call.

So good night unto you all.

Give me your hands if we be friends,

And Robin shall restore amends. “ (V.i.415-430)

Puck refers to himself and his peers as shadows. Shadows are the fairies, but since he is in the play, within the final act, he can also be considered an actor. Therefore shadows can be actors or fairies, and within the play they are being merged. Shakespeare brings in the fairies in the real court at the end and expands the relationship between the performers on stage and audience. The characters that represented imagination itself are the ones that have the last word with the play. Midsummer Night’s Dream has a happy ending. And the play within the play is the highlight of this ending with the representation of the achieved stability, joy and harmony between the lovers and all of the confusion.

Help Received:

Used “No Fear Shakespeare” cited below to view the version of modern English, in order to compare and understand the English in Shakespeare’s era. Looked up the meaning of some important quotes mentioned in this paper to help me better explain my point across.

Work Cited:

-Russ, McDonald, ed. “A Midsummer Night’s Dream” The Pelican, Shakespeare, 2000

-Crowther, John, ed. “No Fear A Midsummer Night’s Dream.” SparkNotes.com. SparkNotes LLC. 2005. Web. 20 Aug. 2015.

-SparkNotes Editors. “SparkNote on A Midsummer Night’s Dream.” SparkNotes.com. SparkNotes LLC. 2002. Web. 17 Sept. 2015

Looking carefully at particular passages in Act V, analyze Macbeth’s state of mind in the final act.

Act V takes place at Dunsinane. Macbeth is left alone in his castle with a few men under his command, serving out of fear rather than loyalty.  Ten thousand British troops with a Scottish joint force lead by Malcolm and Macduff are approaching. His state of mind is unstable and his attitude towards his situation shifts from initially being confident to realizing that he is condemned.

Before the battle, Macbeth appears to be self-assured. He speaks to the servants with confidence after learning that several of the Scottish nobles have defected over to Malcolm’s side: “Bring me no more reports; let them fly all” (V, iii, 1). He uses imperative commands to show that he is still in charge.  Macbeth exhorts the nobles that have changed allegiance to “mingle with the English epicures” (V,iii, 7-8), greatly hinting that the British are effeminate and inferior.  He is convinced that the reports will have no influential consequences on the outcome of the war because of the witches’ prophesies.  The first prophesy, stating that he will not be defeated “Till Birnam Wood remove to Dunsinane” (V, iii, 2), seems greatly improbable. And the second, stating that he could only be defeated by a man not born of a woman, also appears to be impossible. Therefore, these two impossibilities make Macbeth feel blind and invulnerable, that he will never be defeated: “the heart I bear/ Shall never sag with doubt nor shake with fear” (V,iii, 9-10).

As the lonely king learns that there are ten thousand soldiers approaching the castle, his attitude slowly shifts from overly confident, to pessimistic.  He starts to realize that the end is near, and that death is coming.  He commands Seyton, a servant, to help him put on armor for battle, but Macbeth’s tone sounds defeated.  Macbeth compares his life to a dry yellow leaf. Sadly, he says that he will never grow into old age having friends, honor, love and obedience from others. He understands that he is the cause of his own downfall and misfortunes.  However, some eagerness for bravery in him can still be spotted. He says, “I’ll fight till from my bones my flesh be hacked” (V, iii, 34). He then orders for the banners to be put on the outer walls. As his men are truly intimidated by the enemy coming, Macbeth still believes that the witches’ prophesy will win the war and cause mishap to happen among the enemy, such as a famine.

Macbeth’s confident attitude definitely spirals down soon after he is informed of Lady Macbeth’s death.  Throughout the play, Macbeth was known for loving his wife dearly. HHHer death shakes him, up to the point of saying that “She should have died hereafter” (V, v, 17), meaning that she was meant to die at a later time. Because he realizes that he is truly alone now. The reader is able to interpret how Macbeth’s state of mind is due to him becoming so pessimistic after realizing that he has armies marching upon him and that his Lady Macbeth is dead.  He feels and is truly alone.  Macbeth gives such a pessimistic speech that explains how everyone’s existence has no meaning and purpose.  Life “is a tale/ Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, / Signifying nothing” (V,v 27-28). That also means that all his evil deeds have no more weight on his conscience.

Up to this point, Macbeth’s morale may be low due to the unfavorable odds. But the idea about being defeated has not arisen yet. The witches’ prophesies seem so true in his favor that he still feels invincible. But as soon as the messenger delivered the bizarre message of Birnam Wood coming to Dunsinane, Macbeth begins to lose courage and to doubt what the witches had told him: “I pull in resolution, and begin/ to doubt th’ equivocation of the fiend/ that lies the truth” (V, vi, 41-43).  He resolves to rallying the few remaining men and facing the enemy in a frontal attack, which meant death. Macbeth still had a fight in him, partially still believing in the second part of the prophecy and partially because he simply wanted to die as a normal soldier “with harness on [his] back” (V, vi, 52).  He goes off into battle acting mighty and invincible, killing as many enemy soldiers as possible, including Young Siward. Macbeth becomes overly confident in battle as he is slaying men and says, “What’s he/ That was not born of woman? Such a one/ Am I to fear, or none” (V, vii, 2-4). Even though the first prophesy of Birnam Wood turned out against him, he still believed In the superficial meaning of only being defeated by a man born by a woman.

But King Macbeth finally realizes that he is condemned at the very end when he faces Macduff. As he was flaunting his invincibility due to the witches’ apparitions, Macduff says that he was “from his mother’s womb/ Untimely ripped” (V, viii, 14-16). Macbeth immediately becomes terrified as Macduff is not woman born. Macduff eventually puts an end to Macbeth’s story and fulfills the witches’ revelation.

To conclude, Macbeth is overly confident at the beginning of Act V. Then the odds slowly start to turn against him. And his morale becomes very low. But he is blinded and willing to fight until the very last prophesy is fulfilled. He, with very few men, went to an unbalanced fight, still thinking of being invincible.  Only at the very end, when Macduff told him about not being woman born, Macbeth finally believes that he contributed to his own downfall, by believing the witches like a fool and dies, with a defeated state of mind.

Help Received:

Cadet Lloyd gave me advice on how to properly start, set up and review some passages for the short paper.

Compare and contrast Brutus’s and Antony’s funeral orations for Caesar, and explain the significance of your observations. You might, for example, discuss the extent to which each oration reflects the character of the speaker and/or you might discuss the nature of the rhetorical strategies used by each speaker. Pay very close attention to the language and structure of each speech.

Act III is characterized by some of the best oratory work written by Shakespeare.  Antony and Brutus speak at Caesar’s funeral. Each of them gives a different opinion about Caesar. Right after the assassination, there is a lot of commotion happening, and a large crowd has gathered in front of the Roman Senate seeking justice and truth for what happened.  Brutus conceded Antony to speak after himself to the crowd as long as he would not speak negatively of the conspirators.

Brutus speaks first by stating that Caesar was ambitious, and wanted to be king, taking away civic freedom and rights away from the people.  Caesar had gained great political power after returning from his successful wars against Pompey.  And the Republic seemed at great risk with such large power into one man’s hands. Caesar was truly unmatched in power. So Brutus, and several of the other senators, believed that killing Caesar would be for the greater good of the Republic.

The words that could summarize Brutus’s speech are at the very end of his oration: “With this I depart, that, as I slew my best lower for the good of Rome” (Act III, ii, 44-45).  Brutus’ speech is quick to the point, idealistic, and initially effective.  Prior to the speech, Brutus is already considered by reputation as an honest, honorable and wise man.  There are not any continuous repetitions other than the fact that he loved Caesar.  By restating that he loved Caesar, he slowly convinced the crowd that he cannot be blamed for the killing. He committed the assassination for the best for the Republic. “Not that [he] loved Caesar less, but that [he] loved Rome more” (Act III, ii 24). Caesar was slayed because of the presumed ambition of becoming a tyrant that would have caused great harm to the people of Rome. There is no use of rhetorical questions throughout the speech, except for the very end, where Brutus finishes strongly, by grasping the crowd’s support.  He asks them: “Who is here so base that would be a bondman?” (Act III, ii, 29), because that is what he believed that would have happened if Caesar remained dictator. Brutus’ point is all based on the ‘if’ and the ‘may’. He often mentions those two words in his speech, which do not give a sense of authority and confidence on his behalf.

The audience’s opinion was greatly influenced by Brutus’ persuasive speech, up to the point where the Plebeians were saying to “Bring him with triumph home unto his house” (Act III, ii, 48). In ancient Rome, family dynasties and origins were considered to be really important, Roman politicians often attributed their origins to the Pagan Gods. Therefore, it is a great compliment to receive.  It is a very intellectual speech, which does not have much interaction n with the people present. He does not leave his pedestal, whereas Antony does. It has several idealistic ideas. After Brutus, it was Antony’s turn to speak.  Unfortunately for Antony, a supporter of Caesar, the crowd appeared to be hostile due to Brutus’ speech and believed that the assassination was completely justified.

But Antony’s rhetorical ability convinced a hostile audience into a friendly one. His was a nearly impossible feat. With such great odds, he managed to create turmoil in order to avenge Caesar’s death and gain support for the members of the Second Triumvirate. Perhaps, his only advantage was that he had the last word.  Mark Antony proved to be a successful military commander with Caesar in the Gallic wars.  And he also proved to be an effective orator by using different figures of speech and jests to arouse the crowd at the right moment. Therefore, as honorable and impressive as Brutus’ speech may have been, the conspirators had their houses burned and were margined to far regions of the Republic, in order to escape from Caesar’s avengers. The inclusion of several repetitions, rhetorical questions and verbal irony are used to convince his audience.

Antony’s initial part of his strategy starts by showing himself as neutral. Before the speech, he agreed to Brutus that he would not talk negatively about the conspirators. And coming in as neutral would have been the most logical action to take as he also had a hostile audience. He only “[came] to bury Caesar, not praise him” (Act III, ii, 73-75). Then he works on the crowd’s pathos by saying that Caesar was his friend, he was just to him and faithful.  His goal is to initially create interest, sorrow and sadness for Caesar’s death. One can feel the love and grief for Caesar through this expression. The attributes given to Caesar: just, faithful and simply that he was a friend, are the description of a normal respectable person, not the one of a dictator.  Antony is his speech renders good and evil concrete.  Only evil things were said of Julius after his death, and the good was buried with his bones.  It reminds the crowd of the great conquests and wealth brought to Rome in the previous years.  Many citizens benefited from his acts.

The second part of his strategy, after grasping the crowd’s pathos, was to use irony. He called Brutus an honorable man. It did not give away Antony’s intentions right away, and showed as respectful.  But when Antony repeated it throughout his speech with rhetorical questions, the tone became mocking and insulting. He asked “Brutus is an honorable man, isn’t he?” (Act III, ii, 94). It altered the literal meaning of being honorable. Brutus’ honor is being sarcastically being put into question weakened the conspirator’s argument.

Brutus’ main explanation to the crowd was that Caesar was an ambitious man. The ambitiousness is not truly proven, but only presumed by the conspirators due to Caesar’s great power and success. They assumed that he wanted to be king. And Antony works on this minor flaw that is in Brutus’s speech.  He turned the conspirators’ main motive into a faulty one.  With the use of tautology, Antony proves them wrong and questions their honor with irony:

You all did see that on the Lupercal

I thrice presented [Caesar] a kingly crown,

Which he did thrice refuse. Was this ambition? (Act III, ii, 95-98)

Also, to further undermine Brutus’ honor, he points out that Brutus was Caesar’s angel, but yet, he was the one that betrayed him.   The inclusion of these several repetitions, rhetorical questions and verbal irony proves to be so effective to nullify any previous arguments or speeches that denounced Julius Caesar.  The crowd understands that he was slain for no good reason.

Antony’s next step in his strategy was to give visual proof to the crowd of the carnage that happened.

There is nothing noble about someone being mercilessly stabbed over 20 times.  Caesar was unarmed and killed, outnumbered, in secrecy. He brings his body into the forum, covered in his bloody cloak. He then uses an anecdote to persuade his listeners even further. He describes the mantle and the first time he saw it on Caesar.  The first time Caesar wore it was when he brought great glory to Rome by defeating the enemy.  But there now it lay, full of blood and shredded by daggers.

Antony relives Caesar’s assassination from his point of view. He points out to the tears on the mantle and described how betrayed Caesar felt, as Brutus was his friend.  Caesar pardoned Brutus more than once in the past, when he decided to side with Gneus Pompeus in the recently ended civil war.

He then shows the body to the crowd after rousing them even more with the injustices that Caesar had. His mutilated body created further indignation and grief.

Mark Antony strategically ends his speech by reading Caesar’s will. This was to further prove that his deceased friend actually cared about Rome and its citizens.  During the speech, he often mentioned the will, and how he could not read it because it would put the conspirators into shame. He teased the crowd until they finally begged him to read it. Caesar, to everyone’s initial disbelief, left everyone a sum of money and part of his estate for the country.

This final evidence sparks rage into the general opinion, and more importantly, the mob present at the forum.

Antony’s speech was not very intellectual or idealistic, like Brutus’. But instead, it included key elements that won him the argument such as irony, anecdotes, determination, and actual evidence such as Caesar’s own body and will. He stepped down of the pedestal, mingled with the commoners and interacted with them.   This proved to be much more effective, because his ideas were more concrete and better strategically said.

Work Cited:

I used these following secondary sources to better help me understand the figures of speech employed by Antony.

Shakespeare, William. Julius Caesar. Ed. Samuel Thurber. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1919.Shakespeare Online. 26 Feb. 2013. < http://www.shakespeare-online.com/plays/julius_3_2.html >.

Payal, Khullar. Julius Caesar. Summary of Mark Antony’s Speech in Julius Caesar.  Enotes.com http://www.enotes.com/homework-help/give-summery-mark-antony-s-speech-mention-comment-78753

Susan Hurn. Julius Caesar. Summary of Mark Antony’s Speech in Julius Caesar. Enotes.com http://www.enotes.com/homework-help/give-summery-mark-antony-s-speech-mention-comment-78753

Analyze a speech in which you think Claudius uses elaborate language to distract his audience from the truth.

In the second scene of Act I, the reader learns that Claudius, the deceased king’s brother, has taken over the throne by quickly marrying Hamlet’s mother, Gertrude.  In order to avoid multiple scandals going public, Claudius tries to distort the public opinion by giving a very authoritative and proud speech to the court as the new King of Denmark. There is a great use of rhetoric implemented in the opening address.

Claudius succeeded King Hamlet, instead of Hamlet, the first-born.  From approximately the 1100s to 1660, including Shakespeare’s era, the Danish monarch was elected by the Thing or the parliament.  Usually, the crown descended in the royal family with primogeniture rules.  In the play, it was made possible for Claudius to usurp the crown by obtaining votes with the support of his new wife and queen and Hamlet’s depressed state of mind and public grieving of King Hamlet (Kersley 2013).  Hamlet actually refers to this process in Act V, Scene ii:

He that hath killed my king and whored my mother,

Popped in between th’ election and my hopes,

Thrown out his angle for my proper life … (Act V, Scene ii, 68-70)

When Hamlet refers to Claudius as “popped in between th’ election”, he is specifically referring to Claudius’ insertion into the power gap and being elected through the parliament. That is also because Hamlet had been absent from court, studying in Wittenberg (Kersley 2013).

An important American English literature scholar, Roland Frye, argues that there are three primary issues which would have shocked Hamlet, the people present at the Danish court, and also the real Elizabethan audience.  The first concern is the marriage of brother-in-law and sister-in-law, which was regarded as incest and treated in intense moral revulsion in Elizabethan times.  Second, the speedy remarriage of a widow would have been regarded as improper.  Before a widow could remarry, several months of mourning would have to pass.  The widow in consideration is the Queen herself; therefore it is even a bigger indecency. The third problem, which would be discovered later by Hamlet speaking with the Ghost, is the union between a widow and the assassin of her dead husband, and once again, worsened by the fact that the assassinated had been king and the widow a queen.  Relating to the Shakespearean audience and context, deaths in the Renaissance were not easily forgotten. Certain social death rituals did not last for days or weeks, but for months, if not years (Frye 77).

The whole speech can be considered graceful, fluent and already planned out. This is Claudius’ first function as king. Therefore it is important for him to show a good first impression, and that he has the proper legitimacy and credentials to be considered king. Throughout the address, there is much antithesis and usage of words that distract the audience from the truth.  Claudius first addresses the domestic situations. His brother’s death should be grieved together by the whole nation:

The memory be green, and that it us befitted

To bear our hearts in grief and our whole kingdom

To be contracted in one brow of woe (Act I, scene ii, 2-4)

Claudius within these lines is trying to portray a feeling of unity that the kingdom should have and emphasize a collective sense of grief. There are more important matters to worry about, such as the Norwegians. This portion of the speech would denote to the listeners that Claudius is so saddened by his brother’s death, and that all of them should remain together, under Claudius, to render respect to King Hamlet. It would be better to grieve for him with the “wisest sorrow, together in remembrance of ourselves” (Act V, scene ii, 6-7), quickly setting the late King aside.

King Claudius then touches on the new gossip: the fact that he quickly married the queen. He confronts the issue openly, as if there would be nothing wrong or suspicious about the matter. He justifies the marriage in several ways. It is not simply his personal choice for marrying Gertrude, but it is a matter of state. He mentions “The imperial jointress to this warlike state” (Act I, Scene ii, 8-9), Gertrude would be his equal partner and helpful to solve the war with Prince Fortinbras which is closing in on Denmark with his army.

There is a grand ambivalence between celebrating the marriage, and mourning:

Have we, as ’twere with a defeated joy,–
With an auspicious and a dropping eye,
With mirth in funeral and with dirge in marriage,
In equal scale weighing delight and dole,–
Taken to wife: (Act I, scene ii, 10-16)

Claudius justifies the controversial union by making it seem like a benefit to the kingdom. There is a series of oxymoronic phrases which make him look wiser and in control of the situation. The audience that is mourning for the old king will hear words as defeated, funeral and dirge. Instead, the folks that are celebrating Claudius’ wedding will want to listen to joy, mirth and marriage. There is a balance between the mourning of his brother and the marriage to his sister in law (Frye 80).

The first phrase, “twere with a defeated joy” (Act I, scene ii, 10), suggests that there is a celebration that has been defeated or killed.  The two words cancel each other side by side.  The second phrase “with mirth in funeral and with dirge in marriage, in equal scale weighing delight and dole” (Act I, scene ii, 13-14) shows that Claudius is rejoicing for his new marriage and that he is the new King of Denmark, but at the same time Claudius is mourning for his brother’s death, King Hamlet.  He has sadness in one eye and happiness in the other.  His audience is seeing what they prefer to see, either happiness or sadness.

To conclude the domestic aspect of his speech, Claudius thanks the nobles:

Your better wisdoms, which have freely gone

With this affair along. For all, our thanks. (Act I, scene ii, 14-15)

The new king tries to present himself as the legitimate ruler, not as the usurper. He thanks all of the nobles who have helped him ascend to the throne: the ones that elected him and also those who have not interfered when he married his sister-in-law.

Claudius then addresses an important matter that is worrying members of the court. He uses this technique to steer away attention from himself and direct it towards foreign issues. Young Fortinbras is waging war to regain the lost lands by the Norwegians to King Hamlet. The young Norwegian prince is constantly sending threats demanding the lands back.   Claudius speaks with a position of authority. At all times, he is calm and has the situation under control. With his intelligent maneuvering schemes, he explains that he will negotiate with Fortinbras’ uncle, the sickly and elderly King of Norway, which is not aware of young Fortinbras’ intentions. And therefore solve the situation without having to shed blood.

Claudius with his inaugural address can be considered to be authoritative, compassionate and great at maneuvering schemes. The speech is highly successful at distorting the truth about the incest and power scandals from the crowd. His rise to power has been careful studied and executed. This imposing speech makes it seem like he would have been the only way to keep the Kingdom of Denmark from civil unrest.

Works Cited:

-The undersigned followed the instructor’s advice by checking a book as a source from Preston Library:

Frye, Roland Mushat. The Renaissance Hamlet: Issues and Responses in 1600. Princeton, N.J. Princeton UP. 1984. Print.

-This newspaper article was utilized in order to better understand Royal Danish succession:

Matt, Kersley. Why Didn’t Hamlet Become King?. The Guardian.  22 May 2013.

-Reviewed what figures of speech are such as the antithesis and oxymoron from an online dictionary:

http://examples.yourdictionary.com/examples-of-oxymorons.html

-Reviewed certain Act I, scene ii passages for better understanding of the play:

Harding, Stephen. Hamlet Act 1, Scene 2. Genius.com. 2014.

http://genius.com/William-shakespeare-hamlet-act-1-scene-2-annotated/

Explain what you think the ending of the play suggests about the nature of romantic love.

Shakespeare is portraying different views about the nature of romantic love. There are two couples presented that are tied to each other in diverse ways because of their characters and personalities.

The first duo, Claudio and Hero, supposedly represents the ‘classic’ romantic love in which lovers, who have never met, fall in love with each other at first sight. They quickly arrange a marriage in a week. Claudio asks Leonato, her father, not Hero, if he could marry her. She accepts to marry Claudio without knowing him at all before his month long visit and does what she is told.  She is also ready to marry the prince as well, when Don Pedro was wooing her for Claudio. Hero is a passive character. There isn’t any true emotional attraction, especially on Claudio’s part, just a shallow love at first sight.

There is not much emotional attraction or faith in her from Claudio because, as soon as he became suspicious of Hero being unfaithful, he quickly forgets all the love he had, believes that it was Hero at the window with another man, believes Don John and does not interrogate Hero herself about the whole situation. He does not hesitate to shame her publicly. The mishap happened because Hero and Claudio never had a strong understanding of one another. There are no connections and shared experiences through previous encounters.  What Claudio is mainly concerned with is Hero’s virtuousness.

It also appears that Claudio’s opinion about Hero can change quickly. In the last act we see:

Don Pedro
But did my brother set thee on to this?

Borachio.

Yea, and paid me richly for the practice of it.
Don Pedro
He is composed and framed of treachery,
And fled he is upon this villany.

Claudio
Sweet Hero! Now thy image doth appear
In the rare semblance that I loved it first. (V.1.241-246)

Claudio is clearly on the dominant side of his relationship. He wrongly accuses Hero in front of many members of the town, publicly shaming her. After the confusion was resolved, he expects to marry her as if he never committed any wrong towards her.

On the other hand, we have Benedick and Beatrice. Shakespeare tells us that they have had previous encounters, not always positive ones.  Beatrice does not speak not so highly of Benedick at the start of the play, just by hearing his name. Benedick states that he would never get married.  The love is dynamic, due to the arguing and changes of opinion. With the constant arguing and understanding, they are displaying a different sort of love, a more solid one. Beatrice and Benedick can be considered lovers on the same level, regarding dominance in the relationship, unlike Claudio and Hero.   They both write poems for each other, so it is not really a matter of one going after the other.

By the end of Act V Benedick and Beatrice give the impression of a stronger marriage. Benedick, not only asks Antonio or Leonato if he could marry Beatrice, he asks Beatrice herself:

Benedick

Soft and fair, Friar.—Which is Beatrice?

Beatrice

(unmasking) I answer to that name. What is your will?

Benedick

Do not you love me?

Benedick

Why then, your uncle and the Prince and Claudio

Have been deceived. They swore you did

Beatrice

Do not you love me?

Benedick

Troth, no, no more than reason

Beatrice

Why then, my cousin, Margaret, and Ursula

Are much deceived, for they did swear you did. (V.4.72-79)

The second couple in consideration learned that they had been set up the whole time; they realized that they were not in love with each other in the first place.  Both the lovers are full of wit and talkative. As the play progresses, they tend to hide their feelings from each other by verbally arguing all the time. Benedick is not easily fascinated by Beatrice’s beauty, differentiating from Claudio.  He is a firm believer of bachelorhood and only Beatrice’s quick wits and outspoken personality end up convincing him.  Beatrice, on the other hand, is also in love with him, but is too embarrassed to admit it.  But they marry, because they had built love as time and events progressed. Benedick at the weddings says “A miracle! Here’s our own hands against our hearts.” (5.4.91) as the wedding guests find the love poems in prose found in the lovers’ pockets.

Then there are the future challenges that both of these couples are going to face within their marriages. There are the constant reminders of what happened in the past.  Hero will always remember Claudio’s accusation of her. He quickly believed Don John’s lie when Borachio flirted with Hero’s servant Margaret.  Therefore, Claudio will always be concerned with Hero’s faithfulness, as he is easily tricked into believing anything bad about her.  All the wrong doing and accusations that happened in the play can be considered as a stain. During the play, Benedick eventually left his best friend Claudio and challenged him to a duel, to honor Hero, in Beatrice’s sake. This was a clear indication that they are willing to do any sacrifice for the other. It could be easily overcome with time, patience and by building better emotional connections.

Benedick and Beatrice confront each other with issues by arguing all the time. They will have a longer and more solid marriage because of the true and honest passion.  In the future, both the couples will need to be attentive to possible negative whispers that might lead them into believing something that is not true. But on the positive note, Benedick will probably confront Beatrice in case such a thing happens.

Works Cited:

– Crowther, John, ed. “No Fear Much Ado About Nothing.” SparkNotes.com. SparkNotes LLC. 2005. Web. 17 Sept. 2015.

Help Received:

I have used websites cited in the section above to better help me understand the concepts that Shakespeare is trying to portray to the audience. It also helped me understand some passages during the play. Furthermore, I dedicated additional time to review this play with the help of the Writing Center.