A Look Back

After looking back at my older blogs, I’m supposed to analyze and notice how my writing has changed along with my outlook of Shakespeare. Honestly I cannot do that, because the truth is I do not see much of a change. Here I sit staring at my blog posts and I still have to agree with what I have written.
I have focused a lot on characters and what makes them tick and how sympathetic they are. I have also spoken a lot about what I think of the characters personally. I mostly spoke about the characters that people were conflicted over, for example Shylock in ‘The Merchant of Venice’ and Richard in ‘Richard II.’ That is what I’m most interested in – the characters. I like to focus on the characters and how developed they are and how they change and evolve throughout the stories. My favorite aspect of Shakespeare is how people can be so divided with the characters. Some people will love some, while for the exact same reasons those people love them other people will hate the same characters. That is the beauty of Shakespeare’s characters. He can develop a three-dimensional character like no other. His characters maybe likable but easy to hate, but everyone will see different sides of them.
The best example would be Richard II from Richard II. Our class was split about his character. Many found him to be an ineffective king that should not have been in power and should have been taken down. Many felt he was a crybaby that threw tantrums and by the end the same people did not care that he was murdered. The other half felt bad for him and while they did not find him to be a good king, they at least pitied him. I’m from the latter half. The reason why is because he has been king since he was at such a young age so he does not know any other life. He has always had help and has not changed much because of other characters’ advice for him. A lot of time has passed and I have to say after looking back I have to say I still agree.
The same goes for Shylock as well. I still pity him at the end of the play and I still find the way he was preserved and written was very anti-semantic and he was the true good guy of the play and that by making him the villain was not right. By the end he lost everything and he gained nothing. I pitied him the most.
All my opinions pretty much have stayed the same after going through my old blog posts. What I thought of the characters the first time around still stands right now as I work on this blog post after the mid point of the semester.