Shakespeare Study Programs; The Comedies by Charlotte Porter and Helen A. Clarke
C >>
Charlotte Porter and Helen A. Clarke >> Shakespeare Study Programs; The Comedies
Pages:
1 |
2 | 3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7
ACT IV
BEROWNE HEARS SOME SONNETS AND THE KING RECEIVES A LETTER
Does the Princess guess the truth of the matter when Costard delivers
the wrong letter for Rosaline?
What relation has the second scene of Act IV to the Play? Of what use
to the preceding action, and to the present? Of what use are all these
new characters to the Plot? One has been before heard from, but is he
of the most or least use here? Are they of use to the story in any
other way, later? In what respects do their tricks of speech and
affectation of learning suit the aim of the Comedy? Show how the
Sonnet-writing is made the means of unmasking the lovers to each other
and all of them to Berowne. Are the sonnets suited to the characters
of the writers? Contrast the King's and Berowne's in this respect.
Does the King suspect Berowne before Jaquenetta brings her letter? Why
does Jaquenetta say it was treason? Would Berowne have confessed if he
were not forced to? After having so unmercifully followed the example
of the others in condemning them for doing what each was equally
involved in, the climax of forced confession from him is more amusing
than if any one of them had unmasked him, as Longaville did Dumain,
the King Longaville, and Berowne the King. What special fitness was
there in making Dumane find out that the torn letter was in Berowne's
hand and bore his signature?
QUERIES FOR DISCUSSION
Is Berowne's speech to "salve" their "perjury" (IV, iii, 309-383) the
moral of the piece? If so why should not the Play end here? How does
Berowne's final speech in this Act foreshadow the conclusion of the
Play?
ACT V
SPORT IS BY SPORT OVERTHROWN
What were the main events of the last Act and of this one, and how do
they bear upon one another? Why is the revenge planned by the Princess
both fair and prudent? Are the men more in earnest than they seem? Do
the women seem less in earnest than they are? Which man first draws a
lesson from being outwitted, and how is it justified? Show how this
lesson suits the trend of the Play, and advances upon the outcome of
the preceding Act. To whom is Berowne's line (V, ii, 477)--"Speake for
yourselves, my wit is at an end"--addressed? How is the King brought
to confusion? Is the Princess too hard upon him? Why does Berowne
scoff so fiercely at Boyet?
Is the presentation of the Nine Worthies too absurd in itself to mix
well with the courtliness, learning, and elaborate wit of the rest of
the Play? Note Berowne's defence of it (V, ii, 569-571) and his rebuke
to the King for despising it? The Princess's defence of it and its
correspondence with that of Theseus for the show of the "base
mechanicals" in the "Midsommer Nights Dreame." How does Berowne's
humility in accepting the parallel with their own wit-overthrown mask
agree with his boisterous jeering at the mask of the Nine Worthies
later? How does the attitude of the ladies toward it compare with that
of the men and what comment upon it does it constitute in your
opinion? How does it all prepare the way for the sudden sad message,
and also for the decision of the Ladies to rebuff love that is not
serious? What special point is there in the kind of trial Rosaline and
her mistress each specially propose for Berowne and the King? Has it
any relation to what has just been shown of each of them in their
attitude towards others with respect to the humble performers of the
Mask of the Nine Worthies? What makes wit an unalloyed pleasure?
QUERIES FOR DISCUSSION
Is the serious ending of this Comedy a disappointment? Is seriousness
an ending artistically called for by this plot, or only morally called
for? Compare with the serious strain in the "Comedie of Errors." What
does the contradictory little final dialogue between Winter and Spring
add to the significance of the Play?
VI
THE WIT OF THE PLAY
This has been called by Armitage Brown, "A Comedy of Conversation";
and the quibbles in which the Play abounds have been supposed by Dr.
Johnson to give the Author "such delight, that he was content to
sacrifice reason propriety and truth" for their sake. How far do these
observations justly apply to the Play?
In what degree is the extravagant banter of the Play itself an
imitation of current fashions of speech and itself an object of
ridicule?
Its relations to Lyly and Euphuism. (See Extracts from Ward and from
Landmann in "Selected Criticism," in First Folio Edition of the Play).
Make a study of the lesser and larger wit of the play, showing how the
former is merely incidental to the latter.
In what respects is the whimsical talk of the Play suited to certain
groups and to special characters, so that there is more variety in it
than appears at first.
QUERIES FOR DISCUSSION
Does the master wit of the Play consist in any one class of fun, as
verbal conceits in the punning line; practical jokes; Euphuism,
so-called; banter in speech and retort, versemaking and sonneteering,
learned quips, or in the use of all these combined in a way to bring
out the point of the Play--the clash of natural with artificial
methods.
Is wit or purpose dominant in the Play?
Which is the wittiest scene? Is it also the most morally significant?
VII
THE CHARACTERS
Three groups of characters appear in the play--the main group
belonging to the Court; the learned group, Armado, the, schoolmaster,
and the Curate; and the native group, Costard, Jaquenetta, Dull, and
Moth. The two latter subordinate groups add much to the Play. Show in
what respects: as to Plot interest what do they add? As to merriment
and significance? Is the morality and wit of the Play contributed to
by them? Are they of interest in themselves, apart from their relation
to the other characters? Are Costard and Jaquenetta the only happy
lovers in the Play? Why?
Is the King, kingly? In what respects, do you think, does he evince
youth and inexperience? When does he begin seriously to be in love? Is
the Princess justified in disciplining him? How much of her discipline
is due to the event that cuts short the Play? Judging from his
character, do you think he will stand the "twelvemonth" test?
Is Berowne the oldest as well as the deepest and wisest of the men?
How does he show all this?
Why does Rosaline discipline him? Is she in insight superior to him as
the Princess is to the King? Are the other court ladies equally wise
in the probation period they allot?
Are all the men--Costard included--so much a prey to a sort of foppery
of expression and love of animal spirits as to be properly subject to
the satire the play provides for them? Are the women more sane in this
respect, despite their wit, or not?
Is Shakespeare apparently on the women's side?
QUERIES FOR DISCUSSION
Is Costard the bumpkin the best actor in the Mask of the Worthies?
Why? Why is Jaquenetta the least and Moth the most discomfitted of the
third group of characters?
Dowden says the women of the Play "have not the entire advantage on
their side." What do they lack? He also says, to bear this out, that
"Berowne is yet a larger nature than the Princess or Rosaline." What
has this to do with their relative advantage in the Play itself, as
Shakespeare shows it?
Who are the critics of the falseness of artifice in the Play? Is
Berowne on the women's side in the criticism which gives them their
advantage?
VIII
THE MORAL OF THE PLAY
Is there a moral against the current educational methods and the
affectations social and literary of Shakespeare's time? The monastic
and aristocratic elements in education considered as opposed to the
progress of Women and the People. Show the general conditions of
education prevailing after the Middle Ages, and the new spirit of the
Renascence making itself felt, also the degree in which this appears
in this plot. If Shakespeare's spirit, as manifested in this Play, had
been more influential practically, do you think a different road would
have been taken? (For hints upon this line of thought see Introduction
in the "First Folio Edition"). How far is Berowne to be taken as the
spokesman of Shakespeare? Note what Pater says of him as "a reflex of
Shakespeare himself," and trace the truth of this as concerns the fact
that he is never "quite in touch" with the level of the understanding
shown by others of the Play, and state the bearing this has upon the
Moral of the Play. (See Pater's "Appreciations" or extract from same
in "Selected Criticism," pp. 242-248, "First Folio Edition").
Why does so frolicsome a Comedy end so seriously? Does that make it
funnier?
QUERIES FOR DISCUSSION
Is there really a moral in the Play in favor of nature and sincerity
or is it merely read into it?
Is Dowden right, who says "there is a serious intention in the play,"
or Barrett Wendell who says: "like modern comic opera, such
essentially lyric work as this has no profound meaning; its object is
just to delight, to amuse; whoever searches for significance in such
literature misunderstands it."
In comparison with other comedies of Shakespeare, is a serious
undercurrent discernible in all of them, but none in this?
IX
SHAKESPEARE'S PLAY AND TENNYSON'S POEM ("THE PRINCESS") UPON EDUCATION
OF MEN AND WOMEN
Summarize story and outcome of Play and Poem in comparison and in
contrast. Does Shakespeare's exposition of the contemporary view of
education account for the condition Tennyson criticises? If so, are
women to blame for it? If not, how much does this modify Tennyson's
criticism of the educational exclusion that is the scheme of the
College in "The Princess?" Shakespeare seems to point his moral
against his male characters for their exclusiveness, Tennyson against
his women characters? Which one goes the deeper? Wherein do they agree
and disagree? How may they be made to supplement each other? Has
Tennyson's poem presented any phase of the question touching upon
popular interest in exclusive educational schemes? Is Shakespeare,
considering his time, the more democratic in his views of life, as
shown by this Play, in comparison with those brought out in Tennyson's
Poem. Why does Shakespeare leave the women in moral and actual command
of the situation?
QUERIES FOR DISCUSSION
Is co-education the right conclusion to draw from the exposition by
the Poets of educational restraints and the relation of men and women
to life?
What ideals of life as to Nature and Education must be included in
educational schemes? Why does the Play not end with as many marriages
as there are lovers? Is it possibly because Shakespeare did not mean
to bring forward love between man and woman as if it were the only
thing in life but as the typical experience of life that should open
up the depths of knowledge not of love alone but of death and
suffering in relation to it.
MUCH ADOE ABOUT NOTHING
The title of this Comedy broadly describes its character, and is based
upon the double meaning of "Nothing." The events that constitute the
plot are the result of "note-ing" or overhearing and so taking note of
events which are deceptive in some way. Hence, in all the "note-ing"
that takes place, there is, after all "nothing," and the whole amusing
plot constitutes much ado about nothing. The letter "h" in _Nothing_
was often silent in Elizabethan pronunciation. The "h" in "Moth" in
"Love's Labour's Lost" is another example.
Noting or overhearing as a factor of the plot is introduced also in
"Love's Labour's Lost." It is one of several links in workmanship with
that Play and its use there may have suggested the production of a
Play almost altogether built, as this is, on overhearing or taking
critical notice such as Benedicke and Beatrice take of each other.
The part of the plot that is based on an already existent story does
not develop this noteing element particularly. For that reason it is
the likelier that it is a device of Shakespeare's to make up his
Comedy.
ACT I
CLAUDIO NOTES HERO WITH FAVOR AND IS NOTED WITH DISFAVOR
The Story of Act I results, on the arrival of the Prince and his
suite, in making it known that Claudio has noted Hero as "the sweetest
Ladie" that ever he "lookt on." Show how it also comes out in Scene i
that a noting of a severer kind has passed between Benedicke and
Beatrice. The two kinds of special interest--the openly admiring
noting of Claudio, and the captious notice of each other shown by
Beatrice and Benedicke, initiate the two channels of action in which
the plot will run. The normal sex-agreement of the one pair of
characters is varied by contrast with the more unusual sex-warfare
that asserts itself humorously both in Beatrice and Benedicke. Bring
out pertinent examples of their defiance of love and marriage. What
is to be gathered of Hero and her point of view from this Act? How
much from others, from little from herself? And how much from her of
others? Contrast with hers the witness given of herself by Beatrice.
Is Claudio taciturn, too, when compared with Benedicke?
What noting goes on in scene ii? Is it in accordance with what has
already taken place between Claudio and the Prince? What additional
noting comes out in Sc. iii. Is this in accordance with Scene i or
Scene ii? Act I closes with a sense of some confusion which Act II is
required to clear up. In addition to the inconsistency, notice Don
John's enmity to Claudio, and its menace of disaster.
QUERIES FOR DISCUSSION
Is the inconsistency of the last three scenes misleading and puzzling
rather than alluring to the curiosity of the reader?
Could it be made more interesting on the stage by the way of enacting
the part of Brother Anthony?
ACT II
THE PRINCE PLOTS FOR TRUE NOTING AND HIS BROTHER FOR FALSE
Tell the story of the masked ball. What new light is thrown, first, on
the characters and, then, on the plot by means of these fragmentary
bits of dialogue heard as the revellers pass on and off stage
together.
Is Don John really misled as to his Brother's intentions toward Hero?
What does Hero herself think?
Does Don Pedro himself show that he is acting for another--that the
god, Love, dwells beneath his visor? The modernized edition spoils one
of the references to this office in which the Prince labors for Love
and does a labor of love in whose disinterestedness some doubt is
expressed. By changing Love to Jove (in II, i, 92) a literal
correction is made in accord with the legend referred to, but in
entire destruction of the point made by the Prince, if Shakespeare
means to adapt the allusion to his special purpose. Note also
Benedicke's name for Claudio (II, iii, 34). What is your opinion of
this? (See Note on II, i, 91, in "First Folio Edition"). Compare
another instance where the Prince shows that he is acting for Cupid
(II, i, 358-367). Is Don Pedro the most active spirit in the plot?
Show how in Acts I and II, it is made clear that the plot will consist
in the prevalence of either a favorable or unfavorable influence upon
the happiness of the characters. Who represents each influence?
Notice that the favorable influence in its first action in favor of
Claudio's happiness is misunderstood, discounted and disbelieved in
several directions. Is Claudio led to distrust of the Prince by others
or by his own jealousy?
In the second action of the favorable influence initiated by the
Prince, which of the characters share? Does the unfavorable influence
work against Benedicke's happiness?
What is Borachio's place in the action of the unfavorable influence?
QUERIES FOR DISCUSSION
Noteing or overhearing is itself nothing or has a large element of the
deceptive in it. How is it made to work well in Benedicke's case? Is
the element of truth the only one that is effective?
ACT III
THE NOTE-ING IS NOTED
Show that the action taking the Story on consists in the "note-ing"
already planned being enacted and being noted as true. How does this
work with Beatrice in Scene i?
In Scene ii the unfavorable influence makes its preparation to carry
on the plot disastrously by the same method. How is this made clear?
In Scene iii the "note-ing" is as effective for evil as that in scene
i, is for good. But a counter influence is brought to bear upon it
which consists in "noteing" the falsity of the first "noteing." Show
how this is arranged and promises to solve all difficulty. But the
marriage is shown next to be in active preparation, and then the
promise of intervention in time to frustrate Hero's disgrace is in
scene v itself frustrated by the bestowal of all Dogberry's
"tediousness" upon Leonato and by his own impatience. Show the place
in the action of the hurrying on of scene iv, and the tediousness of
scene v, and of both on the humor of the Play.
QUERIES FOR DISCUSSION
Are the Prince and Claudio justified in the action they propose?
Is the element of chance, which both destroys the falseness of the
evidence by means of Borachio's talk, and prevents it from being known
by Dogberry's, especially fitting? Why?
ACT IV
HERO IS REPUDIATED AND BEFRIENDED
Does Claudio's demeanor in the repudiation scene betray the violence
of love?
What is to be inferred from the Prince's words and those of his
bastard brother Don John?
Is it natural for Leonato to be convinced and to know his daughter no
better?
Why is the Friar on her side? Notice how the Friar represents the
Church as Dogberry does the Law. As institutional forces of civic
life, outside the circle of the central group of characters, they
intervene in the action of the drama when it is properly amenable to
outside influences and civic instrumentalities. And both are brought
into the sphere of the Play by a means in sympathy with the artistic
method belonging to it. Observe how Dogberry is made humorously to
desire to have everything noted down, and how the Friar has come to
the conclusion that Hero is innocent "by noting of the Ladie." With
the Friar on her side, Hero and her one staunch friend--Beatrice are
enabled to follow a policy of resistance to her disgrace and of
re-establishment, first, of her good fame and, then, of her happiness.
How is this brought about? The share of the Friar in rallying her
friends to be loyal, and the share of Beatrice in instituting a
counter-movement to the accusation combine to what effect? How does it
suit with the scheme of the action that the love of Benedicke and
Beatrice here attains its climax?
What does scene ii accomplish for the plot?
QUERIES FOR DISCUSSION
Is the injection of tragedy at this Fourth Act into the Comedy
effective? Does it change the character of the Comedy or merely
intensify it?
Does Beatrice ask an unreasonable deed of Benedicke when she says
"Kill Claudio"? Suppose it were to prove true, instead of to be
prevented as may be already guessed, by the defeat of Don John's false
witness and evil influence: Is Beatrice justified in refusing
Benedicke if he will not kill his friend because it shows "there is no
love" in him?
ACT V
THE DOUBLE WEDDING
The valor and humor of the two old men against the two young ones has
especial value in restoring the comic vein. How does this somewhat
belated loyalty of Leonato act upon our sympathy with him? Does the
forbearance of Claudio and the Prince toward the two men raise our
esteem of them or lead to further dislike?
What effect has the mock heroics of their ineffective challenge on
Benedicke's earnest championship of Hero? Is the Prince's satiric
speech (V, i, 208-209) to be interpreted as complimentary to
Benedicke? Notice Claudio's next speech in comment upon it, and
explain the implications intended.
What does Leonato mean by blaming Borachio less than the three nobles?
How far do you think him justified--the relations of master to man at
the time being considered?
Was Margaret to blame? Why did she not make the cheat known? (Cf. V,
iv, 5-7 with V, i, 311-314). Is it worth while to spend much time on
making all minor details clear?
Is Claudio's consent to a second marriage creditable, natural, or a
clumsy expedient which only the entire hollowness of the whole plot of
false noting as to Hero renders endurable? Can you imagine any way of
acting the part of Claudio that would make it seem attractive?
Do you find it in character at the wedding that one couple says so
little, the other so much?
QUERIES FOR DISCUSSION
Is the ending of the Plot happily contrived in too forced and unreal a
way?
Which is the most stirring scheme in the Play and why?
Which is the funniest, and is it possible to say why?
THE CHARACTERS
Does this Play succeed in giving so extremely definite and varied an
impression of the characters that it is chiefly notable for that? To
bring out this idea of the plot as successful less in itself than
because it illuminates the quality and humor of the characters,
compare with the "Comedie of Errors" or any of the Plays where events
figure more prominently. Show how the events of this Play may be said
to be created by the Characters. The Prince and his Brother (and their
tools on each side who lend themselves to their plans with Dogberry,
the highly unconscious, and the Friar, the highly conscious character)
by being what they are constitute the diverse means of influencing the
whole turn of events. These persons may all be considered with
reference to what they are themselves, in character, and through that,
in relation to the other characters of the Comedy.
BENEDICKE AND BEATRICE, CLAUDIO AND HERO
These two loving couples reveal their special characters most vividly
by means of their contrasting and supplementary relations to each
other. Show how Benedicke and Beatrice do not throw Claudio and Hero
too much in the shade by their superior brilliancy, because through
the love of the minor couple their own love is enabled to ripen. Is
their character heightened or lessened in wit and individual interest
by love?
The minor characters: Show how the adversity of the family brings out
the heroic element lying unobserved in Brother Anthony of the "dry
hand," and kindles his philosophy into something martial.
The merry maids, Ursula and Margaret and their light-hearted parts in
the plot.
QUERIES FOR DISCUSSION
Beatrice "is a tarter,--and, if a natural woman, is not a pleasing
representative of her sex." She "will provoke her Benedicke to give
her much and just conjugal castigation," says Campbell. Is he right,
and will Benedicke feel so?--or is Swinburne right, who says she is "a
decidedly more perfect woman than could properly or permissibly have
trod the stage of Congreve or Moliere" and who speaks of her "light
true heart"?
Is the superficial Claudio worthy of Hero?
Are the faults in the plot of the Play, such as are necessitated by
the design of using the characters themselves and their "noting" of
one another as the source of events, and, therefore, in the last
analysis not faults, a study of their relation to the design leading
us, as Hartley Coleridge puts it, never to censure Shakespeare without
finding reason to eat our words?
A MIDSOMMER NIGHTS DREAME
Having read "A Midsommer Nights Dreame" as a whole, if it be not
already fresh in the mind, or, if possible, having seen it acted, then
consider more carefully the characteristics of its dramatic structure,
studying the plot and progress of the story as it is unfolded act by
act, also the sources, the characters, and so forth, as suggested in
the following study.
ACT I
THE CROSSED LOVERS
Sum up the incidents and characters introduced in the first Act and
ascertain which are most important in influencing the rest of the
story.
It may be noticed that Theseus and Hippolyta and their marriage
festivities are personages and events which make up a decorative
external sort of frame for the whole play, but that the centre of the
action takes its start, primarily, from the conflict of Hermia's love
for Lysander with her father's choice of Demetrius, and, secondarily,
from the clash of Helena's love for Demetrius with his suit for
Hermia. Show how the brisk bit of dialogue between Hermia and Lysander
(I. i. 141-166) implies the forthcoming plot. For example, it may be
shown that 'to be enthrall'd to love' (the first folio reading is
_love_ instead of _low_, which was an emendation of Theobald's,)
[Footnote: See foot note in First Folio edition.] and to have
'sympathy in choice' made as 'momentary as a sound, swift as a shadow,
short as any dream,' is to be the fate of all the lovers in the play,
except Theseus and Hippolyta, and to constitute the substance of the
action.
Consider what relation the second scene has to the story. Is it more
extraneous to the movement than the scene presenting the Duke and his
bride? It is linked to the crossed lovers group, on the one side, by
the part the chief of the 'rude mechanicals,' Bottom, is to assume
with Titania, although this does not appear in the first Act, and
Shakespeare's intention to do something special with this character is
only shadowed forth here by its prominence. On the other side it is
linked to the ducal group still more superficially, merely by the
rehearsal of a piece to be played at the wedding. It may be contrasted
with the preparation in 'Hamlet' for a piece similarly played before
the Court, but which had a vital connection with the action and
characters which is lacking here. Can there be said to be an artistic
design, however, though of a more external sort, in the contrast
between the Court scene and the rehearsal scene, and the realistic
offset the latter scene supplies to the fairy fantasies that are to
follow in the next acts? For instance, it may be shown that the
merriment the clownish scene provides balances the dignity of the
ducal scene. His audience, having put a yoke upon the dramatists by
requiring a clown, his genius is betokened here by his making it an
artistic advantage.
Pages:
1 |
2 | 3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7