“I Don’t Get It…”

For my Themester activity I attended Adam Zuckers “Twelfth Night and the Broken Jest.” This talk was honestly right up my alley, Mr. Zucker discussed the idea of jest and even after scholars analyze and attempt to deduce certain jokes from the past, we still “don’t get it….” Most jokes I would like to think I understand, but there are those certain jokes that I hear and try to analyze for days and days, and I still don’t get it.

When I think of Shakespeare I can’t honestly say I think of jokes and laughter, sometimes I think of crying, but not from laughter. Mr. Zucker was especially amusing to listen to because he related to his topic, he told personal accounts of not understanding another persons jest. Honestly, after listening to Mr. Zucker I think I finally got it.

-Chelsea Mills

The Themester event I attended was the October 7th showing of Margin Call. The basic plot of the movie details a single day at an investment firm in New York as the employees of the firm decide to sell all their worthless assets and essentially crash the economy so that they don't lose their money. Overall I really enjoyed the movie and thought it was an extremely interesting and entertaining movie. I really can't compare this movie to anything we've read in class. Throughout the film, all of the characters are aware that the end decision is going to be to crash the economy so that they can keep their money, and some of them grapple with the moral issue of causing other people to lose money while they keep it, but there's never really any internal conflict. There's no sudden and dramatic realization of wrong doing like Lear has. All the employees just kind of pass the responsibility onto their bosses to let the boss make the decision, and each boss seems to have risen to their higher place by being more and more self serving. There's a definite analysis and observation into human nature that we see in Shakespeare, but Margin Call doesn't have that questioning tone towards the nastier portrayals of humanity. It's more like sadly accepting its portrayal and suggesting it won't change. This tone really gets driven home when at the end, the main boss of the investment firm gives a big speech and lists all the times that the world economies have crashed so that a select group of people will save money. He starts listing years in the 1600s and goes through maybe 20 times throughout the history of capitalism that crashes like the one in the movie have happened, and then says, "And there have always been and there always will be the same percentage of winners and losers. Happy foxes and sad sacks. Fat cats and starving dogs in this world. Yeah, there may be more of us today than there's ever been. But the percentages-they stay exactly the same." It kind of makes me happy I'm not a business major. 

Posted on behalf of Joseph Hegeman

Everyone is not what they seem

For my Themester blog, I chose to see the movie Catfish. Catfish is the true story of Nev Shulman, who started a relationship with a woman he believed to be a young, blonde artist, but who actually turned out to be a middle age woman. Relating this back to Shakespeare, Catfish definitely uses the theme of deception that Shakespeare was always incorporating into his plays. I’ve interpreted Shakespeare’s constant usage of lying and deception as more of a message that mankind as a whole fuels itself off of lying. Though Nev figured out that he was being catfished and the woman wasn’t the beautiful blonde he had grown to be fond of, he ended up creating a friendship with this woman. She ended up being a very kind person and a great friend to Nev. This also made me think of Shakespeare because, whether it was a comedy, tragedy, history, the antagonist or protagonist, deception didn’t discriminate. Shakespeare was proving that anyone is capable of deceiving you, no matter what kind of person they are. 

posted on behalf of Jacqueline Kiley

Deception and Misidentification in Cymbeline and Catfish

While watching Catfish, I couldn’t help but notice certain similarities between the movie and Shakespeare’s Cymbeline, most notably in their themes of deception. 

The movie is surrounded by this idea of deception, not just in its plot (a young man falling for a woman who is not who she says she is, online) but in the idea of the film itself –did the events recorded actually happen, did the filmmakers exploit not only their subject (Nev) but the woman and her family?  Throughout the entire film, we are left questioning what and who is real, and who is truthful.

This reminded me of Cymbeline both thematically and in plot structure.  Like we are left questioning which online figures are real or simply created personas in Catfish, in Cymbeline the characters are confused about the true identities of others.  We see this misidentification in Imogen (posing as a boy), Morgan/Belarius (posing as Guiderius and Arviragus’ father), and in Cloten (whom, in death, Imogen mistakes for her husband).  These misidentifications drive the plot and culminate in the end scene, where everyone is revealed as their true self and things are seemingly well.  Likewise, in Catfish, the filmmakers questioning of a family they know only through Facebook, leads to the culmination of the movie, where the family is seen as they truly are and the lies are exposed.

I think both the film and the play expose a common theme: the fear of being deceived and the power of deception.  The characters in both works are constantly speculating on if they are being deceived and in the end, these deceptions have enormous ramifications and lasting effects on the characters.

Catfish and All's Well That Ends Well: Similarities Between Modern and Shakespearean Deception

     I was actually looking forward to seeing Catfish because of it's popularity in modern day culture. As a fan of the MTV television series based off the documentary, I was curious to know the story of identity deception that started the whole phenomena. Even before watching the film, I knew I would find similarities between Catfish and one of Shakespeare's plays. Since Shakespeare used deception so often as a theme in his plays, it was only logical to assume that I would connect the documentary to a play I was familiar with.
     All's Well That Ends Well was the play that I immediately knew I could compare with Nev's story. In All's Well, Helena deceives Bertram in order to get the thing she wants most in the world: his love. She goes through with the bed-switching plot in hopes of becoming pregnant and therefore forcing Bertram to love her. This all seems like a perfect ploy for Helena; she gets to lose her virginity to the man she loves most and she also wins his heart in the process. Though it's not the way she would have originally wanted things to go, she seems to have no hesitations with fooling Bertram. She is obsessed with obtaining his affection that she convinced herself that an awful act of deception is the only way she can win him over and that no one would question her morals in doing so.
     Angela from Catfish reminded me of Helena because of the strength of her desire. She had affections for Nev, but knowing that she was unavailable to him in so many ways, decided to create a false front for him to meet. This identity she hid behind, Megan, got Nev's attention and started a bond between the two that would eventually last for almost a year. Angela was determined to win the affection of Nev in whatever way that she could, and so the idea of hiding behind a mask of a false person seemed like no problem to her. She didn't care about the eventual outcome of it all, she just cared that she got to interact and build a relationship with Nev. That is where she differed from Helena - when Helena seemed to have her future all figured out after she fooled Bertram, Angela only cared about the interactions of the time being and how she felt in that moment.
     These two women, though they thought they had good intentions, were blinded by the actual nature of their actions. The deception they caused in the name of love was justified in their eyes, but was hurtful in the eyes of their lovers. Helena and Angela both just wanted to be with the men they desired, no matter how they obtained their love. There are many similarities between modern day deception and Shakespeare's deception, showing that even over time and the countless changes to society, people are willing to use deception and lies to end up with their goal.

Fishing for an Audience: Not as New as We Think

I was fairly familiar with the central concept of Catfish the film as I have seen the TV quite a few times. Deception plays a fairly central role in the TV show; Nev and his friend approach almost every case with a very skeptical view of the supposed relationship. And almost every time I have seen the show, the investigation (I use the term loosely) reveals that the person is in love with a character created by the real person on the other side of the screen. Deception was not present at the outset of the movie, although it certainly becomes a central theme later on. The deception in Catfish seems very real and very tangible, with the supposed love interest becoming a potentially mentally unstable middle aged woman. In a case of art imitating life, Catfish received some criticism as to how real the documentary was. Many viewers of the film speculated, and offered ample evidence, that the documentary was staged. If true, Catfish can simply be viewed as a modern film adaptation of the deception common in Shakespeare’s stage plays. The buzz surrounding the deception of audience members and the subject of the film generated a larger audience for the film. Shakespeare knew audiences love to see conflict, and apparently so did Catfish's crew.

 Shakespeare uses deception in many ways through his plays. Helena’s deception of Bertram in All’s Well is Helena literally using her social network to create a relationship, just like Nev’s love interest. This discourse in Helena's relationship attracted viewers in the same way as Nev's personal "problem play". The concept of disguised or mistaken identity is also heavily used in Shakespeare’s works. Catfish presents the story of the problem that stems from social networking as a means of forming relationships, but Shakespeare seems to be an original producer of illusory lovers as entertainment. 

Themester Blog: Catfish, or Fishing for the Fool

“I don’t see how watching a movie about people catching catfish is going to be interesting…or related to Shakespeare,” remarked my roommate Megan as I prepared to head over to the Cinema. At that moment, I remember that I stopped in my tracks and couldn’t help but crack a small smile at the thought of actually donating two hours of my time to the pursuit of determining parallels between the Bard’s work and fishing.

After allowing a snort to escape, I turned back to her to say “I thought I already told you that it’s about internet phishing- you know, that whole thing that happened to Manti Te’o.”  She just shook her head in failed recognition and waved me off with the same assertion that she still didn’t see how I could connect such a topic back to Shakespeare.

Truth be told, for the first half hour or so of the movie, I couldn’t help but think that she may have been right. As I watched Nev Schulman begin a months-long romance with a beautiful online stranger only to find out that she was an unhappy, slightly insane middle-aged housewife, the only Shakespearean-related moment that kept popping into my head was the infamous Bed Trick that Diana and Helena orchestrate in All’s Well That Ends Well. At first, I chastised my memory, thinking, “Really, Ianna? This is the best you can come up with?” But the more I dwelt on it, the more I was able to see why the idea, silly as it initially was, wouldn’t leave me alone. We talked in class over the misogynistic implications of the scene: Bertram is so concerned with having sex that he literally doesn’t even realize that the person he thinks he’s sleeping with is someone else entirely. And while I'm not about to launch into a discussion on misogyny and internet phishing, the Bertram's obliviousness can't be ignored.

 In the film, Nev firmly asserts to his brother that Angela, the woman who catfished (is that even a verb?) him, “didn’t fool me. [She] just told me things and I never cared to question it.” This same viewpoint can be applied to Bertram’s situation with the Bed Trick. Helena came to his bed claiming she was Diana and Bertram seemed to have no qualms with that statement. Looking at this situation with Nev’s words in mind, Bertram is hardly the victim of these two women’s machinations, as he claims to be in Act 5 when the truth comes out.

And that’s what I think might be the biggest link between Catfish and All’s Well.  Nev was a victim of Angela’s devices despite his instances that he wasn’t fooled. It was heartbreaking to see him make the revelations he did and even more so when we find out that instead of anger towards Angela he demonstrates pity instead. Bertram, on the other hand is not a victim at all, and his sputtering around for excuses in order to preserve his dignity only serves to paint him as an even bigger fool than he already is.

Misidentified Monarchs

I’ve been noticing mistaken identities in Cymbeline and Henry IV Part I. Obviously we’ve already gone through the frankly astounding number of confused identities in Cymbeline: Innogen as unfaithful, Innogen as Fidele, Fidele as dead, Cloten as Posthumus, Posthumus as Italian…the list goes on. It’s hard not to notice the sheer frequency with which mistaken identities occur, and how absolutely ridiculous they are at times. Mistaken identities are a little more subtle in Henry IV. The most notable misidentification, I think, is King Henry’s (honestly, everyone’s) negative evaluation of Prince Hal. Aka Harry. Aka Henry V. He has many names.

The audience is aware that little Hal will one day grow up to be perhaps the greatest king of England. They know he is brave, compassionate, inspirational, clever and kind, and yet no one else can see this in Hal, least of all Hal himself. Prince Henry has no idea he is destined for greatness, or that he has the tools to achieve it. He only identifies himself as a fun loving drunkard, and a failure of a son. In a compelling soliloquy in Act I Scene II, lines 185-207 in the Arden edition, Hal vocalizes this, and vows to change. “I’ll so offend to make offence a skill, redeeming time when men think least I will,” (I.iii.206-207). Of course there are many ways this soliloquy can be interpreted, but the interpretation that seems most true to me is succinctly described in our notes by Johnson: “…a great mind offering excuses to itself,” (Kastan 162).

As Innogen is identified as false and unfaithful, as Cloten is identified as princely and good, as the Queen is identified as kind, Prince Hal is identified as good for nothing. I think the misidentification in both plays allows for greater character development, and a fuller arc of self-discovery; it’s much more satisfying to see Hal questioning who he is and how much he is worth, and eventually realizing his full potential than have him perfect from the beginning. It makes him human, and relatable. We all have questions about who we are, we all misidentify ourselves and others. It creates room for growth.

posted on behalf of Emily Sullivan

The Hunt for Hannibal

This is extremely belated, but I assure you, it will still be a good blog. The Hunt leaves an impression.

The Hunt is a Swedish film starring Mads Mikkelson, known in the U.S. for his chilling Hannibal the Cannibal on NBC’s Hannibal (also his chilling good looks according to my friend, Courtney). Mikkelson plays Luke, a kindergarten teacher, the only male teacher at his small school. Through no fault of his own, he is accused by Klara, the young daughter of Luke’s best friend, of sexually abusing her. This is, of course, a lie. Klara was angry at Luke, and wanted to get him in trouble. She had no understanding of the implications.

Eventually, the small Swedish town turns entirely against Luke. I will leave the gory details out, and avoid spoiling the movie for you.

The entire movie, I was eerily reminded of Arthur Miller’s The Crucible. A whole town, turning on one man based on the testimony of a single girl? A fever of paranoia sweeping a city? Sounds familiar. However, I wasn’t immediately drawn to any of Shakespeare’s work.

I saw similarities between Timon and The Hunt, in terms of betrayal, and the downfall of a man. Both Timon and Luke’s best friends betray them. They are both alone in a world against them. Driven by madness and grief, they both turn into misanthropes. The endings to both of their stories leave a sour taste in one’s mouth.

The theme of the sexual abuse of children, however, is absent from any of Shakespeare’s works. Was this because it was difficult to have children onstage at the time, because the topic was taboo, or was child abuse not acknowledged during the Bard’s lifetime? I’m unsure as to why.

The Hunt is an excellent, albeit painful, film, and I believe it may be nominated for an Academy Award soon. I highly recommend it. I would encourage you to bring tissues and a stress ball, for those high-tension moments.
posted on behalf of Emily Sullivan

Timon Zuckerberg

I like to consider myself a bit of a connoisseur of Oscar-nominated movies, so when I saw that the cinema was airing The Social Network and Margin Call, two movies I had not yet seen, I jumped on the opportunity. There’s really no need to say that both were fantastic, although I preferred The Social Network. What I really appreciated about the Themester showings at the theatre were the varied networks each movie illustrated; where in one movie you saw Mark Zuckerberg creating Facebook, easily the mightiest and most widely-used “social network” of modern times, in another you saw a group of financial geniuses deal with the biggest crisis their company faced in its history.

I won’t lie, I could probably make this post all about how beautifully filmed and how snappy the dialogue is in The Social Network (Aaron Sorkin is a screenwriting god) and not mention Shakespeare once, but there was a massive parallel that sticks out to be upon reading Timon of Athens. Jesse Eisenberg, beautifully portraying a college-age Mark Zuckerberg, unintentionally draws lines between himself and Timon that I can’t ignore upon having read the book and re-watching the movie. Although the account of the creation of Facebook isn’t entirely truthful, there must be some truth in the tagline “You don’t get to 500 million friends without making a few enemies.” Starting in the beginning of the movie, Mark progressively alienates himself from the very few friends he started with, including Eduardo Saverin, the co-creator of the website and Erica Albright, his (fictional) girlfriend turned ex.

It’s not hard to say that everything ended much better for Mark, no matter how fictionalized the movie may have been. Their ends were all a result of wastefulness though – Timon gave away his money wastefully, while Mark gave away his friendships wastefully. Timon was too blind for his own good, and Mark was too selfish for his own good.

Watch this movie though. So good.

posted on behalf of Skylar

The Hunt (For Social Progression)

For my Themester activity, I attended a mini-lecture and presentation of the 2012 Danish film, The Hunt. Though the film was almost entirely in Danish (with English subtitles), it was one of the most engaging movies I've seen in a while. 

The Hunt tells the tale of a warm and amicable small-town kindergarten worker, Lukas, who is unjustly and rashly accused of sexual assault when an upset young girl makes up a story after Lukas spurns her childish love fantasies towards him. As usual, the child is believed, and soon the entire close-knit community turns on him, metaphorically banishing him to the very outskirts of society.

            As part of the presentation, a Danish sociologist focusing on social networks gave both an introduction and a concluding discussion, in which he talked about the social phenomenon of conformity. Looking back on it now, I am immediately drawn to the parallels in conformity between The Hunt and many of Shakespeare’s works, especially Much Ado About Nothing, where again an entire group of people instantly believe a fabricated tale based off little to no evidence. While the subject of both stories are ultimately redeemed, they both have to endure great hardships, as they are based in cultures where one’s reputation is almost all they have.

            Although created more than 400 years apart, the depicted problems of conformity in these works did not change, and therefore their message is the same: conforming to major social beliefs can be hugely dangerous and often unjust.

Mendacity and Crap

       While I was not particularly fond of the play Cat on a Hot Tin Roof, I did enjoy the underlying themes, backstory and the overall connection to King Lear by William Shakespeare. The most profound connection that I saw between the two plays, was that of Big Daddy and King Lear. Both men seemed to have favorites when it came to their children, however they seemed to have the most trouble with the child that was their favorite. For King Lear his favorite daughter Cordelia gave him trouble as she would not profess her love to him before everyone to get her piece of his kingdom. This thoroughly upset Lear and he banished her and no longer called her his daughter. For Big Daddy his son Brick was clearly the favorite when it came down to it. However, Brick was an alcoholic and was thought to have had relations with another man. While the other children were discussed in both the plays, Gooper in COAHTR and Regan and Goneril in KL, the men seemed most distraught when it came to their other children Cordelia and Brick. 

      A huge theme in the play was mendacity which means untruthfulness. Big Daddy stressed the importance of being truthful to Brick and how everything revolves around it. This was ironic as his entire family was being untruthful to him about his health and Gooper through this all was trying to swoop in to gain control of the family business for when his father died. Also, this theme is shown in King Lear as Goneril and Regan lied to their father about how much they loved him just to get bits of his land and kingdom for themselves. The girls and Gooper had ulterior motives when it came down to it and were merely looking out for themselves.

      Although I did not particularly enjoy the play, I thought that it was cast very well and that the scene was wonderful. I also enjoyed seeing the many parallels between Cat on a Hot Tin Roof by Tennessee Williams and King Lear by William Shakespeare.

--posted on behalf of Avery Postema

Fathers in Shakespeare: Less Mature Than Their Daughters

As mentioned in the prompt, we discussed the parallel of the openings of King Lear and Midsummer: both fathers cutting off their daughters and not using their power as a father and king for the greater good. Apparently, Shakespeare really loves to use a problem father with a great amount of power as a way to move the plot forward, because another line could be drawn between Egeus and Cymbeline (as well as Innogen and Helena).

I suppose the greatest difference between the problem of marriage in Cymbeline and the problem of marriage in Midsummer is that Innogen has already married the man she loves, whereas Helena simply refuses to marry the man that her father desires her to. Both girls face incredibly severe consequences as a result of their action, Innogen facing the banishment of her husband and Helena facing threats of death with the only other options being giving in and marrying or becoming a nun for the rest of her life.

            “As she is mine, I may dispose of her:

            Which shall be either to this gentleman

            Or to her death, according to our law

            Immediately provided in that case.” (1.1.46-49)

Both girls pose a valid argument against their father, but both are incredibly stubborn and refuse to hear any side of the conflict that doesn’t support their own. The plots of the plays are quite different, but in the end, both parents recognize their faults, although Cymbeline’s recognition is slightly more convoluted, as he nearly kills his daughter in the process.

            “So through Lud’s-Town march,

            And in the temple of great Jupiter

            Our peace we’ll ratify; seal it with feasts.

            Set on there! Never was a war did cease

            Ere bloody hands were wash’d with such a peace.” (5.5.470-474)

Through acts on acts of convoluted yet hilarious twists and turns, Helena and Innogen both end up happily. Their fathers, although stubborn, see the errors of their ways and realize that what is best for them, and often for most others, is the happiness of their daughters before the happiness of themselves.

--posted on behalf of Skylar

Runaway Love

We are presented with lovers who simply cannot be together in Cymbeline and Midsummer Night's Dream. Posthemus and Innogen, shown in Cymbeline, are married and Posthemus was sent away by King Cymbeline as he was not accepted as the husband of his daughter. Lysander and Hermia, shown in MND, are in love and wish to be married but Hermia's father Egeus refuses to let it be. Posthemus promises that he will see Innogen again and says he will remain faithful as he steals away into the wilderness; 

Remain, remain thou here
While sense can keep it on. And, sweetest, fairest, 
As I my poor self did exchange for you, 
To your so infinite loss, so in our trifles 
I still win of you: for my sake wear this; 
It is a manacle of love; I'll place it
Upon this fairest prisoner. (Cymbeline I.i.145-151)

Lysander and Hermia, on the other hand, decide to run into the forest together to escape the cruelty of Hermia's father and the decisions that they would be forced to make;

And in the wood where often you and I

Upon faint primrose beds were won't to lie,

Emptying our bosoms of their counsel swelled,

There my Lysander and myself shall meet;

And thence from Athens turn away our eyes

To seek new friends and stranger companies. (MND I.i.214-219)

These few characters were willing to do whatever it took to be together and to live happily despite what their parents (and more specifically, fathers) thought of their relationships. Also, they were able to overcome the odds and trials that were presented to them. For Innogen and Posthemus it was the belief that Innogen was being unfaithful and for Lysander and Hermia it was the fact that love spells were involved and they were led astray from one another. In the end, both couples made it through and were able to be together. 

posted on behalf of Avery Postema

Same Ending Different Play

While A Midsummer’s Night Dream is a rich comedy with many striking similarities to other Shakespearean plays, I found one small detail of similarity particularly interesting. In both A Midsummer’s Night Dream and All’s Well That Ends Well, a character comes onstage at the end of the play and directly addresses the audience. In the end of MND, the mischievous fairy Puck calmly states if anything in the play was offensive, simply imagine it to be merely a dream.

“If we shadows have offended,

Think but this, and all is mended,

That you have but slumber’d here

While these visions did appear.” [V.I. 409-412]

He then goes on in the last lines of the play to implore for the audience’s applause, saying “Give me your hands if we be friends…” [V.I. 423] This address to the audience is strikingly similar to the address given by the King at the end of All’s Well That Ends Well, in which the king practically begs for the audience’s approval.

“All is well ended if this suit be won,

That you express content; which we will pay

With strife to please you, day exceeding day.” [V.III. 335-338]

Then, just like in A Midsummer’s Night Dream, the final lines are a plea for applause: “Your gentle hands lend us, and take our hearts.” [V.III. 340]

The interesting difference between the two plays however, is why Shakespeare used a direct address to conclude the play. In All’s Well, an explanation to the audience and plea for applause makes sense, due to the troublesome nature of the play and unresolved ending. Contrarily though, MND has a happy, comical ending that is rarely viewed as “problematic”. It is interesting then that Shakespeare would choose to end two dissimilar plays in the same manner. 

While They Were Sleeping

While reading A Midsummer Night’s Dream, I couldn’t help but think of Cymbeline. From the beginning, Cymbeline has a fairy-like tone, with many of the conventions of a fairytale. As  it is so fairytale-like that there are actual fairies in A Midsummer Night’s Dream, there is a clear distinction of the two plays that separates them from the rest of the works we have read. Apart from the strong affiliation to fairytales, the two plays both have major plot points based around people falling asleep or being put to sleep. Slumber seems to be when the most significant moments of the plays occur

For example, the major conflict in Cymbeline begins when Imogen falls asleep.  The lines

“Sleep hath seize me wholly,

To your protection I comment me, gods.

From fairies and the tempters of the night

Guard me” (2.II.9-13)

are strikingly similar to anything you would expect out of Midsummer.

 Of course, Imogen does fall asleep and that is when the trickery occurs. Similar to the fairies in Midsummer Night’s Dream, Iachimo commits this crime without realizing just how severe the repercussions will be.  A lover’s quarrel ensues, much in the same way that it happens in Midsummer, and is only after Imogen and Posthumous both sleep that anything can be resolved. When Posthumous is visited by ancestors and, conveniently, a god he is enlightened in much the same way as the lovers of Midsummer are enlightened by the magical nectar that returns them to their right minds. There is such a dreamlike quality to the resolution of  Cymbeline that the lines

“Are you sure that we are awake? It seems to me

That yet we sleep, we dream” (Midsummer 4.I.201-202)

seem like an appropriate ending to the play. There is no denying the dreamlike qualities that tie these two plays together. 

--Posted on behalf of Becca Williams

Jacqueline on Midsummer

To me, I saw parallels between Demetrius and All’s Well’s Bertram. Demetrius was quick to drop Helena when he met Hermia, just as Bertram was quick to try and seduce Diana, despite being married to Helena. Bertram and Demetrius both display qualities of being shallow, and, though the women’s reactions to the way the two men act are different, they both end up married to Helena in the end.

Midsummer also relates back to a lot of the plays we’ve read, as most have an element of force. Shakespeare seems to like to throw some of his views on what could be interpreted as “free will” and whether we have free will or not. Since there always seems to be an element outside of the person that is leaning them in one direction or another, or at least trying (for example, the potion in Midsummer or Helena tricking the king into letting her pick to marry Bertram), I think Shakespeare is trying to show he believes we don’t have 100% free will in our lives.

posted on behalf of Jacqueline Kiley

All's Not Well That Ends Forced

Deception is a common theme in Shakespeare's A Midsummer Night's Dream, which is not so surprising given the strong presence of fairies in the play. They cast spells on multiple characters in the story, creating false appearances and feelings. This includes Demetrius, a young Athenian aristocrat who is put under a spell so that he will love a woman whom he does not care for.

This is also seen in Shakespeare's All's Well That Ends Well. In that story, the heroine figure, Helena, tricks the man (Bertram) she loves into a forced marriage situation. At the end of the play, her would-be-lover realizes that he has been bested and reluctantly resents to marriage. 

In both situations, a fabricated marriage is created, and is not truly what the male in the relationship desires. Though both these stories have seemingly happy endings, (for all is well that ends well) the element of deception in the makings of these pairings seems to taint them and the very idea of love. 

This tarnishing of love is interesting in that it seems to echo Shakespeare's own love life. He himself was forced into wedding with his wife. Given this, ideas for the lamentable situations of Demetrius and Bertram might have arisen from his own personal life.

Lysander and Posthumous: A Parallel Between Midsummer's Night Dream and Cymbeline

When we first see these characters they are in love with the objects of their affections and are seen making sacrifices for them.  Posthumous has been banished by Cymbeline for marrying Imogen; Lysander, likewise is seen enduring Hermia’s father, Egeu’s, wrath.  Both men plan to see their lovers, despite the fathers warnings: Posthumous promises to see Imogen again, while Lysander devises a plan to steal away with Hermia.

Towards the middle of the play both characters change their attitudes towards Imogen and Hermia, respectively, albeit for very different reasons.  Convinced of his wife’s infidelity, Posthumous denounces Imogen, even going so far as to plot her murder – a stark contrast to the devoted husband he had previously.  Likewise, when placed under a spell that causes him to fall in love with Helena, Lysander spurns Hermia, treating her with the utmost contempt –at one point, he even tells Hermia he hates her.  Again, this a far cry from his previous behavior: before falling under the spell, Lysander spoke to Hermia lovingly and with respect.

Ultimately, I think these characters are distinctly similar, in demeanor and their storylines.

Timon's Fantasy

   At the beginning of Timon of Athens, Timon seems to live in a very altruistic fantasy world, one where there are no consequences to “taking care” of his friends. This provides a striking contrast to the misanthrope he becomes, having lost faith in the world after being tricked by the people he thought he could trust. Apemantus tells Timon, "the middle of humanity thou never knewest, but the extremity of both ends" (IV.iii.300).

    I thought of this contrast in particular while reading Midsummer, which also has distinct realms of fantasy and reality. Though it may seem this play is the most apparently odd, I find Timon’s actions in his own fantasy realm just as bizarre at times.

    Timon’s friends coveting of his wealth is not unlike Oberon’s coveting of Titania’s changeling boy. Just like Titania refuses, so do Timon’s friends when he asks for their assistance in his own time of need. Both of these events lead to the rising action in each of the plays, and link the realm of fantasy to a more realistic one.

    The difference is between each of these stories, however, is in the ending. Although the fantasy and magic in Midsummer ultimately assists in a happy ending and corrects all its former mistakes, Timon’s fantasy is his downfall.

Cloten & Bottom: To Laugh or to Cry?

A Midsummer Night’s Dream is arguably Shakespeare’s most popular comedies. Which is why the character connection between Bottom, the weaver in Midsummer, and Cloten, the oafish Prince in Cymbeline, seemed like the most fitting comparison. The most amusing character trait that Bottom and Cloten share is that both are arrogant beyond belief and overconfident to a fault. When reading the plays I couldn’t help but link the two characters together. Bottom suffered from blatant stupidity, which is riddled throughout the whole play. He misuses words and phrases often, and is usually corrected by his fellow troop members. Robin, the trickster, later casts a spell upon Bottom and turns his head into an ass, which is all too fitting. Bottom and Cloten are both asses, I wish Shakespeare had cast a spell upon Cloten much like Bottom was, “And I am such a tender ass, if my hair but do tickle me, I must scratch.” (MND 4.1. 26-27) the hilarity is unmistakable.

Cloten’s pursuit of Imogen clearly showcases his arrogance and lack of wit. In the 3^rd act, after Imogen verbally kicks his “ass” (because he’s kind of an ass…get it?), his rebuttals are the perfect examples of his wit. Imogen states “Fools are not mad folks.” Cloten replies” Do you call me a fool?” Imogen then states “As I am mad I do…” (Cymbeline 2. 3. 116-118) I honestly don’t think anyone could have said it better. Both Cloten and Bottom are arrogant and overconfident, which makes them the most amusing characters amongst their fellow characters. I also think they’re hilarious, stupidity can either make you cry or laugh, and I couldn’t help but laugh at these two.
--posted on behalf of Chelsea Mills

Jokes and Maps and the Interpretive Lens of Time

            In October, I attended two Themester lectures within only a few days of one another:  Adam Zucker’s “Twelfth Night and the Broken Jest,” and Janelle Jenstad’s “Networks and Neighborhoods in Early Modern London.”  Though these two guest speakers explored drastically different fields of study, I was struck by their common encounters with time and timelessness within Shakespearean studies.

            For the most part, Dr. Zucker’s talk focused on coming to terms with our temporal limitations in understanding Shakespearean jest.  He pointed out several scenes in Elizabethan and Jacobean literature that, despite the most thorough scholarly research, still remain a mystery as to how or why they are funny.  However, even as he expressed his frustration with such enigmatic jests, he affirmed the timelessness of humor, which provides readers of any historical setting an access point to older literature.  Many of the funniest Shakespearean insults (“widdyshins” was a personal favorite of mine) have no linguistic history whatsoever, meaning that even four hundred years later, audiences can still find enjoyment in their slapstick absurdity.  We may not be able to fully understand every joke – and in some cases we are left, like Aguecheek, completely clueless – but we can find some satisfaction in knowing that something funny is happening, and according to Zucker, we should embrace this sense of stupidity (itself a timeless feeling) as part of the reading experience.

            Dr. Jenstad, on the other hand, has little room for the timeless in her construction of the Map of Early Modern London.  In fact, what stood out most to me in her lecture was her assertion that “there is no such thing as ‘Early Modern London.’”  Rather, she argued, the London portrayed by the Agas map is a medieval city under enormous pressure to meet the needs of a rapidly growing population – a task it fails to accomplish.  The definitive contemporary guide to London, John Stowe’s Survey, had to be republished twice within only a few decades, and its latest publication in 1633 was already out-of-date within a few years.  Dr. Jenstad aims reconstruct a picture of a city that existed for a mere blink of an eye between the end of the Elizabethan era and the Cromwell revolution, and thus every concept or piece of information she and her colleagues encounter must be understood in relation to a specific date and location.

            As I considered these varying treatments of temporality, I wondered (for my own amusement) which aspects of Shakespeare’s plays I find more engaging:  the timeless, or the time-tethered.  After thinking this over, I realize that I love discovering time-specific points within Shakespeare’s work (such as his critique of Jacobean bounty in Timon of Athens), but also that I cannot begin to understand these specific facets without being given access to the play by its universal elements (archetypal characters, Timon as a Christ figure, feelings of obligation and generosity, etc.).  I am now interested to learn if my peers process Shakespeare’s work in the same way, or if some reverse the process, starting with historically specific elements and allowing those discoveries to influence their understanding of the plays’ timeless themes.  My hunch is that no one fits squarely into one category or another, but that there is a varying degree of give-and-take between the timeless and the temporal in each person's interpretation.  Research like that of Dr. Zucker and Dr. Jenstad, in providing new insight into old plays, continues this dialogue between universal and particular as we strive to understand Shakespeare's work several centuries removed from his heyday.