Midterm Assignment

Up to this point in the semester my blog posts and replies have been focused on the structure of Shakespeare’s plays and the effects these structures have on the audience as well as the relationships between the characters. However, as the semester has progressed I noticed in re-reading my most recent replies that my attention is most drawn to the nature of the characters.

In my first blog post entitled “Distractions?” I noticed I specifically focus on the construction of both The Twelfth Night and A Midsummer Night’s Dream. I mention how the side-stories within the main story served as a bit of a distraction in my readings and suggest further how this type of scattered plot structure would effect me during a live performance. I ultimately close in disagreement with Shakespeare’s method by saying, “When read, these types of literary tools are enjoyable and really highlight the skill of the writer but on the stage (in my experience at least) these kinds of methods have more potential to confuse than to bring things to light.” At the beginning point of this semester, I appear to be most impacted by my inability to connect with depth of Shakespeare’s structural dynamics as a member of the audience.

However, when I discussed Much Ado About Nothing in a later blog post called “The slightest breeze shifts the sail” although my concern remains somewhat rooted in structural dynamics of the play it also delves into the dynamics between the characters as they are represented to the audience. In response to my observation of Shakespeare’s swift tendencies to change the course of a relationship between characters (in this case I specifically refer to Beatrice and Benedick) I write, “Perhaps this is just an attempt at highlighting the fact that the play is a comedy because it is rather hilarious how effectively the schemes, words, and actions of the characters work to move the others.” I address the point that the fluidity of Shakespearean characters may be deliberately incorporated to highlight the genre for the audience. Further along in the post, I make an argument against Shakespeare in regards to how convincing the relationships between the characters end up being as a result of this tactic. I ultimately decide that (from reader’s perspective at least) most of the dynamics (as they are presented within and without Shakespeare’s works), although constructed with depth, are left open to interpretation.

In one of my most recent replies (to Christina Lee’s post “Hate”) I noticed that my sole focus was on the nature of Richard’s character in The Tragedy of King Richard the III.  I consider his role as a villain and build upon Christina’s point of Richard’s “psychological hate” due to his physical deformities. In re-reading this particular reply I noticed how my attention shifted from the dynamics in regards to the play as a whole to the dynamics of characters within the play.

I think this progression in my observations and interpretations says a lot about how I have advanced as a reader of Shakespearean literature. In a way, after reconsidering the direction of my thoughts I feel as though I am gaining experience as a scientist in regards to understanding the anatomy of Shakespeare’s plays. It shows how I have moved on from dissecting the organism (the play itself) to it’s organ systems (the things represented within the play) and now, with King Richard, the organs themselves (the individual characters within the play).  Keeping with this idea of analyzing literature from this scientific perspective, I should remember there are several more layers to explore beyond the organs before I can reach an understanding of the building blocks. In that sense, if nothing else, I think I should use my previous postings as a motivation to continue digging deeper. 

Until we were given this “meta-post” project, I did not even realize the implications of these weekly blogging assignments. I think the bi-weekly pattern of posting blogs and replies coupled with those weeks when our discussions were exclusively held in the class really allowed significant transformations to occur in my own perspectives as a literary critic. In other words, there was a natural growth of thought taking place beneath the surface. If I’m being honest, I think I value this particular assignment over all the others for the mere fact it brought to light how valuable these weekly online discussions really are. The way I see it now, these posts have become a source of active proof representing my growing strength as an English student.