Family Love

I thought of this idea of family love or love from the family for Romeo and Juliet. We obviously know that Romeo and Juliet are in love with one another, but in order to have successful love don’t the families need to love them as well? What I mean is don’t the Capulets need to love Romeo and the Montagues need to love Juliet in order for the two to live in complete happiness? I always thought that in order for “a pair of star-crossed lovers” they need to live in complete happiness. They cannot do this because their families are fighting each other. Aren't the parents suppose to support the children's decisions? I think that if the families would have found out about this love they may have stopped fighting. How did Romeo and Juliet plan to live their lives without their families? They are both too young, in my opinion, to live happy lives without their families. Is the reason why these two are in love because their families hate each other? What are everyone’s thoughts on this topic about family love?

Helena is Hilarious

I actually found a lot of this play funny, but a conversation between Helena and Demetrius particularly made me laugh.
(II:i:204-210)-I am your spaniel; and, Demetrius, The more you beat me, I will fawn on you. Use me but as your spaniel, spurn me, strike me, Unworthy as I am, to follow you. What worser place can I beg in your love, And yet a place of high respect with me, Than to be used as you use your dog?
Ok, so basically translated to today's slang terms, Helena is saying that if he gets with her she will be his 'bitch'. She is offering to do anything for him, she will wait on him hand and foot, she would be completely and entirely his 'bitch'. And the more he shits on her, the more she will be sprung on him. I don't know if anyone else found this funny, but the maybe the reason this particularly hit me is because I think this is very relevant to today. Many women are just as stupid and stick with men who treat them horribly, and welcome the abuse. And I'm sure many people can say they've known women that put up with abuse from men, and you ask them "Why do you stay with them? Why can't you just leave them?" They agree with you about the fact that they should leave, yet they won't and don't have a good excuse about why they stay. I think Helena provides the reason she puts up with this abuse from Demetrius and the reason is included in Act 1, scene 2, lines 234-239 when she says 'Love looks not with the eyes, but with the mind; And therefore is wing'd Cupid painted blind. Nor hath Love's mind of any judgment taste;...' She is saying that she really has no clue why she is in love with him but she loves him. Today's translation of that would be 'head over heels,' and I would venture to guess that many people can relate to what Helena is going through to at least to a certain extent.

Quince's Prologue

In Act V, Scene I, Lines 113 – 122, Quince recites the opening prologue of the play of Pyramus and Thisbe. This prologue is an example of a particularly clever use of words and punctuation by William Shakespeare. Quince recites the introduction using the wrong punctuation, pausing in incorrect places and beginning and ending sentences in a different way than the play’s author had intended. The prologue has the complete opposite meaning than otherwise intended, as a result of the use of varying punctuation. Theseus’s comment on Quince’s lack of attention to punctuation draws attention to the passage’s brilliance. Quince’s version of the introduction is offensive and rude, and says that the upcoming show is meant to be offensive, will end in its actors’ execution, and that the play does not entertain. The passage should really stress that the play should not offend others, but instead show off the actors’ skills, and delight its audience. It is a fantastic job by Shakespeare to have written a passage that when read with different punctuation can have the completely opposite meaning.

Quince's Prologue

where do the fairies fit into the Great Chain of Being?

On Thursday Sarah left us with the question: Where do we think the fairies fall into place on The Great Chain of Being?

I think the fairies would fall into the place of God on the Great Chain of Being because their actions reflect those of Gods in Greek mythologies like The Iliad. In The Iliad Gods meddle in the mortals lives without their consent by starting wars, choosing sides and changing fates. In The Iliad Zeus and Hera( the king and queen of the gods) are at odds with each other. Hera and her friend Athena hold a longstanding grudge on the Trojans and thus do everything in their power to annihilate them and help the opposing army the Achaeans start the war. Initially Zeus doesn’t take sides but ends up going against Hera and lends help to the Trojans in order to help Achilles (a great warrior/ main subject of The Iliad). Both Zeus and Hera employ gods to help their chosen armies win. While the mortals are treated like pawns and have no power or say in how the Gods act on them and change their fates. Likewise, In a Midsummer Nights Dream the fairies (specifically Oberon and Puck) change the destinies of the Helena, Hermia, Lysander and Dymetrius (they also change Bottoms head into that of an ass). Oberon and Titania are feuding over the Indian Prince whom Oberon wants and Titania refuses to give up. To punish Titania Oberon sends Puck to put a magic potion over her eyelids as she sleeps, so that when she wakes she will fall in love with a hideous monster and have to give the prince to Oberon to end the spell. Oberon also decides to use the potion to make Demetrius fall in love with Helena( and as we all know this gets screwed up and puck accidently makes both Lysander and Demetrius fall in love with Helena.) In the end Oberon gets his way and Titania gives him the Indian prince in return for his stopping the spell; Lysander’s love for Hermia is renewed as well as Bottom’s old head. However, Demetrius’s spell is never lifted and though all four mortals have happily coupled off Demetrius had no consent over his new fate. The fairies play the role of God in the Great Chain of being, playing with and changing the destinies of the Athenian’s who enter their realm.

"Will not the ladies be afeared of the lion?"

So this is in reference to Act 3, Scene 1, Lines 26-45-ish.  I was reading this and found myself laughing, and I’m not sure if I’m missing something/crazy or if I understood correctly but are Bottom and Snout seriously discussing the fact that they think it’s necessary to warn the ladies of the theater that the lion is not real, so that they aren’t too scared?  I know this play’s a comedy and there are some silly parts but this just really got me.  Especially after watching the acting of the play-within-a-play from the movie that we watched in lecture, I just found it hilarious that the actors really thought the ladies would be so scared of the lion.  “Therefore another prologue must tell he is not a lion” (Snout).  Anyway, I got a laugh out of that and wanted to clarify that they are being serious and I understood correctly, and wondering if anyone else got a little kick out of this?

Up and Running

Your class blog is now up and running. If you have any questions
or encounter any problems while using then, then please email
me. I've put some interesting links up, and will probably
continue adding to them over the course of the semester. Enjoy!