Shimasaki, #1
The
first act of this play is very interesting. We are introduced right away to
probably one of the central struggles throughout the play, the love square of
Hermia, Lysander, Demetrius, and Helena. The tension between lovers seems to be
a main issue that Shakespeare likes to write about as seen in another of his
plays, Romeo and Juliet. This
four-way love conflict shows an imbalance. There could be two couples yet
Demetrius chose Hermia and scorned Helena. His opinion on the whole matter
seems to be only that he wants Hermia as a prize, and does not want Lysander to
have her out of his own competitive nature. He tells Lysander to “yield thy
crazed title to my certain right” (Act I.II.95-96). He only views Hermia as
another conquest and just a “title”, while Lysander, although his love may be
extreme, actually does love Hermia. I don’t think this enough to constitute
these two men as foils quite yet but they are defiantly contrasting characters.
What do you think about the characters that have been introduced so far and
what their dialogue says about their personalities?
The second part of Act
I seemed very random to me. I understand why they were performing the play but
the play that they chose and the actors seemed out-of-place in the story. They
are amusing and Bottom is just a bossy man who wants to be in charge. All the
actors seem to exaggerate every problem that presents itself which, I guess,
adds to the comedy. Quincy’s idea that if he roars to loudly, and “would fright
the Duchess and the Ladies, that they would shriek and that were enough to hang
[them] all” is outrageous and an overstatement. The play itself alludes, again,
to Shakespeare’s own play, Romeo and
Juliet. The idea of two lovers that eventually end up dead because of a
misunderstanding could be foreshadowing of what is to come? What do you think
of this section and what do you think it adds to the overall idea of the play?
No comments:
Post a Comment