Dearest Britt,
I’m so glad we finally get to read
another book together and send each other these letters. Writing down my ideas
like this snail mail style really helps me form new ideas and opinions about
the book we’re reading. The first thing I noticed and appreciated about A Midsummer Night’s Dream was its vastly
different setting and time period from the other plays William Shakespeare
wrote. A Midsummer Night’s Dream is
set in ancient Greece and mentions ancient Greek heroes like Hercules and the
Amazons. Ready a Shakespeare play that doesn’t take place in Elizabethan England
is refreshing and makes me instantly more interested in the story and the characters
its about. One of the other first things I noticed about this play is how
poorly the women are treated. Early on in Act 1 Scene 1 Egeus comes to Theseus
seeking advice regarding his daughter’s love life. She has fallen in love with
one man and despite his merit, benevolence, and high social standing, her
father wants her to marry a different one. Instead of talking it out like two
normal human beings in a healthy relationship they go to their leader Theseus
and he responds to their problem
by saying,
“As for you, beautiful
Hermia, get ready to do what your father wants, because otherwise the law says
that you must die or become a nun, and there’s nothing I can do about that”
(Act 1 Scene 1).
This response seems ridiculous, even for those times because obviously
there is something he could do about it, he’s the leader! Women and their place
in society is a theme that Shakespeare explores in a lot of his work so it’s interesting
to see how that theme plays out in a vastly different setting in a much earlier
time period. What do you think about this topic in Shakespeare's work? Who's your favorite character so far? Thanks for writing with me, I'm excited to keep reading this play.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteHowdy from the hood, Hannah!
ReplyDeleteI am so thrilled to be writing to you once again, and you’re right, this style of discussion really gets the thoughts frothing. Your reflections on women are almost too relevant, since immediately it is evident in this play how unjustly they are treated. This is especially evident since Eugus doesn’t even give any real justification as to why Hermia needs to follow his direction besides stating that she is his daughter and therefore owes it to him to do whatever he says. Additionally, it is clear that Demetrius does not offer any sort of clear advantage over Lysander, as Lysander describes himself as being “as well derived as [Demetrius],/As well possessed. My love is more than his./My fortunes every way as fairly ranked…I am beloved of beauteous Hermia” (I.i.99-104). Lysander shows that not only is he at least an equal to Demetrius, Hermia actually loves him and her feelings should definitely be taken into account since they are planning her future. It is already clear that Shakespeare is going to use this conflict to comment on the roles of women in society during his own time in England, and I can’t wait to see what comes next.
My favorite character thus far is definitely Nick Bottom. Through our first scene that includes him, he appears to be hopelessly self-confident and utterly unaware of how he portrays himself to other people. This is expressed when he wants to play every single role in the play, as he says “Let me play the lion too. I will roar, that I will do any man’s heart good to hear me” (I.ii.31). He has appeared to be quite shallow so far, but I think that Shakespeare will definitely use his character in the future and I am intrigued as to how that will work out. ¡Gracias por escribirme!
Top of the monring Brittany!
DeleteAfter reading Act 1 I felt quite comfortable with this play and felt like I was finally understanding Shakespeare for the first time but Act 2 was a bit more confusing for me. Act 2 introduced a lot of new characters to the story and with these characters came a slew of new issues, specifically issues dealing with relationships. This Act also introduces a lot of mythical elements such as multiple different faeries and the idea of curses and spells. The characters introduced in this Act were: the fairy king Oberon, his wife the fairy queen Tatiana, the "puck" Robin GoodFellow, and some other assorted Fairies. I thought it was stange that Shakespeare included so many fantasy elements because I dont remeber him including this many far-fetched characters in his other works. During this act we see a lot of arguments between couples like Oberon and Tatiana, Helena and Dimetrius, and we even see some conflict between Hermia and Lysander. Oberon is so filled with hate towards his wife that instead of trying to work out their problems he lashes out in angers and uses a love potion on her, cursing her to fall in love with the first thing she sees, saying:
"Whatever you see first when you wake up, think of it as your true love. Love him and yearn for him, even if he’s a lynx, a cat, a bear, a leopard, or a wild boar. Whatever’s there when you wake up will be dear to you. Wake up when something nasty is nearby" (Act 2 Scene 2).
HIs reaction to his argument with Tatiana is childish and reminds me of a lot of Shakspeares other characters and how immature and dramtic they act like Hamlet or Romeo. I'm interested to see how the story progresses.
Sayonara!
Long time no see, friend!
DeleteIt is true that Shakespeare seems to have quite a thing for dysfunctional relationships, and especially for strife arising in relationships for things they cannot control. For example, after Lysander is given the potion while he sleeps, he says, “So thou, my surfeit and my heresy, /Of all be hated, but the most of me. —"(II.ii.114-115). This potion has caused Lysander to completely abandon his affections for Hermia, but not by choice. Do you think this will ever be put right since the wrong Athenian was given the potion? Also, why do you think Oberon wanted to give the potion to Demetrius in the first place? I see pretty heavy parallels in this situation when compared Romeo & Juliet as well. In both instances, the sets of lovers fall victim to things outside of their control, and end up completely out of sync with one another when it comes to their thought processes. Hopefully this will turn out better for Lysander and Hermia than it does for Romeo and Juliet. I also agree with you that it is very interesting that Shakespeare causes fantasy elements to play such a significant role in this play since all of his other ones are far more rooted in reality. However, I think this gives him far more opportunities for symbols and metaphorical language since there are more elements that can be assigned meaning or defined by the reader or author. I think that the use of fantasy within the text is something we should keep an eye on to see how it plays into the symbols, motifs, and themes involved in the narrative as the players progress. How do you think these characters will be progressing in the coming scenes? I think that Puck’s role will continue to become more prominent. In terms of relationships, I predict that things will develop to be far more chaotic before any of these conflicts are resolved.
Keep it crackalackin’!
What's popping, bro?
DeleteI found this Act really interesting because a lot of actions and confrontations that seemed inevitable to me finally occured. In response to your question, I think we will see Oberon and Tatina's relationship/conflict develop further throughout the rest of the play.
It's interesting to see how each character reacts differently to the effects of the love potion in their lives. Helena lashes out at Hermia saying that she created this entire scheme to humiliate her and mock her lack of a love life while Hermia reacts by doubting her own abilities and her looks and beings to think that maybe her love with Lysander wasn't that strong to begin with. These reactions reveal a lot about their characters showing that Helena is a more aggressive, active character while Hermia is more passive and doubtful. As the dilema progresses we finally see Hermia stop doubting herslef and lash out towards Helena and this is when things get interesting. The ladies trade insults and i found it quite shocking because while women can be catty at times, usually they are supposed to be more reserved and well-mannered, especially back in these times. I think the argument between Hermia and Helena is hilarious and the insults they trade quite funny. Another interesting aspect of this Act is the idea that Robin really feels no remorse for the big mistake he made. Oberon tells Robin that this whole catastrophe is his fault and Robin responds by simply saying:
"In that case, it must be fate. That’s the way of the world. For every man who’s faithful to his true love, a million end up running after a different lover. (Act 3 Scene 1).
Robin really feels no regret about what he has done and find the whole issue really amusing. He keeps blaming the "mere mortals" and their immaturity and stupidity for their problems but I find them confsuing because it was his stupidity that got everybody into this mess in the first place.
Keep it real
What’s the haps on your side of town?
DeleteI agree with you in that there was certainly a significant amount of character development for Robin in this act. Not really in the sense that his character progressed morally, but just that more was revealed about him to the audience. At his initial introduction, he seemed to recognize that some of the things he was doing to mess with human lives were bad, but at this point he is still not feeling any remorse, even for altering the lives of these four individuals in such a substantial way as he reflects, “And so far am I glad it so did sort, /As this their jangling I esteem a sport” (III.ii.363-364). It is so interesting that he is so unconcerned with how their lives turn out as long as it entertains him, while Oberon is incredibly invested in getting both of these couples together for good. Why do you think this is? I think that this propensity for meddling likely has something to do with his own splintering relationship with his wife, something that I think we will be exploring more in the next two acts as it is the only plotline that has not seen much resolution. However, speaking of revolution, I am interested to see if all of the characters react well to the antidotes that Robin gave to them as they slept. I thought the scene of all of them going to sleep right during their fight was definitely strange, but it also did have the desired effect. Additionally, I think it is very interesting that Robin (who seems to care for nothing except his own fancies) is so willing to bend to the will of the king and restore the couples to one another. This brings me to another point regarding Helena and Demetrius. I am very curious as to why Oberon is so keen on getting them together in the first place since Demetrius clearly has no desire to be with Helena. What made him favor Helena like this? Back to the queen, though, I am wondering why Shakespeare did not give more time to the plotline of queen Titania following around the donkey-headed weaver. Perhaps that will come up more in the next section as well. I find it encouraging that the play seems to be wrapping itself up without any casualties so far, but I have read enough Shakespeare that I am definitely staying cautious as I read this ending, since it is more than likely that at least one death will occur before we reach the finale.
See you in a blue moon
Sup homie B?!
DeleteWe finally finished the play! It always feels good to finish one of Shakespeare's plays, it makes me feel smart and accomplished. I really enjoyed reading this play simply because it was so different from normal Shakespearean literature. His involvement of the greek setting and characters (especially the mythical creatures) made it feel more like a greek comedy than a Shakespeare play. Despite dealing with classsic Shakspearean themes like love, fate, and difficult familial relationships, it felt very different from his previous works. Obviously it wasn't very similar to a greek tragedy either because nobody died a tragic death due to their own mistakes. The use of the mythical characters added an almost devine aspect to the play making it seem even more greek since pretty much every Greek play involves the gods. One of the parts I disliked the most about the ending was how Demetrius and Helena actually ended up getting together. Obviously they weren't right for each other beacuse their realtionship was an abusive trainwreck before Robin got involved. I don't understand why Robin and Oberon were so detemined to get those two together so when they finally did get together it felt very unanatural and forced. I also feel like there was a lot of untapped potential within the characters of Theseus and Hippolyta but instead of developing them they remained an afterthought in the story and stayed shallow and flat characters throughout the play. What do you think? All in all, I realy enjoyed the A Midsummer NIght's Dream and thought it was a refreshing change from Shakspeare's normal style of story. Thanks again for being my official literature pen pal.
Keepin things spicy since '99
- Hannah glynn
You are so right that this play is so different from any other Shakespeare that I have read before, and I loved the mesh of Shakespearean themes with elements of fantasy and the Greek setting. I also really enjoyed the wrap up of the play, since it is rare that one of Shakespeare’s plays ends well. I thought the restoration of Helena’s relationship with Demetrius was quite interesting and raised a lot of questions, especially since they had been engaged before. These events got me thinking about the possibility that Helena and Demetrius were really in love and their relationship had been ruined from one other force the first time. Following this theory, Oberon would just be restoring the relationship that one of his fairies had ruined in the past, and therefore it would be an act of justice after all. I really enjoyed Shakespeare’s exploration in this play through the themes of fate and a human’s control over their own life when there are unseen forces involved. I also really appreciated his analysis of the way plays can be perceived differently by different audiences when Theseus said, “The best in this kind are but shadows, and the worst are no worse if imagination amend them” (V.i.203), to which Hippolyta replied, “It must be in your imagination then, and not theirs” (V.i.204). I think this was a wonderful expression on how the audience determines the true meaning of a play, and in this way, being an audience member is by no means a passive role. Especially emphasized by the running commentary as the lovers watched the play, Shakespeare illustrated that audience members have as much power in determining the experience that a play creates as the actors do. I also think that the ending of the play was very fitting, as the events of the play were mythical and had a happy ending that felt dreamlike, and through this soliloquy Puck was able to draw the audience back in one last time and involve them in the resolution of the play just as they had been involved in the other scenes. Overall, Shakespeare created a very unique experience throughout A Midsummer Night’s Dream, one that was different from many of his other works while retaining the themes and eloquence that defines his work.
DeleteAs our journey nears a close, I have only one thing to say to you: shoe me once, shoes on you, shoe me twice, I’m keeping these shoes. -bg
I love your observation about how audiences work to create meaning--that's the basis of Reader Response theory. Well done also drawing toward themes. Sometimes they are harder to establish in a comedy than the tragedies, but at least no one dies! Do remember when analyzing Shakespeare to use quotes from the original, not the No Fear, even if you use No Fear to understand what's going on. Grade on PP.
ReplyDelete