Midterm Blog

It was very interesting to analyze my own writing and ideas weeks after I realized them.  After revisiting my last three blogs, I noticed that each of them have a uniting similarity.  It is clear that each blog focuses on one specific idea in that week’s reading.   Instead of choosing a broad concept or a few points of interest, I narrow my writing to one passage or dialogue or character.  My first blog, “Shakespeare’s reoccurring “Debbie Downer” (regarding the first reading of The Merchant of Venice) focuses solely on Antonio’s sulking demeanor in 1.1.  In my second blog, “And in this corner” (regarding Taming of the Shrew), I chose to only concentrate on the quick and witty conversation between Katherine and Petruccio in 2.1.   In my last blog, “Finally a HAPPY woman in Richard II,” I draw my attention to the 3 women portrayed in the play and discuss their ultimate success or dismay.  I found that reading a blog with a narrow focus helps the reader to connect with the piece and your point of view.  This idea of a narrow focus is something that I will definitely continue to utilize while I continue with my blogging.

Though each of my blogs maintains a specific focus, I discovered something very interesting.  My first blog focuses on just one character, my second blog focuses on two characters, and my third blog focuses on three characters.  This was not planned at all.  I think this shows a nice progression of finding parallels between characters and expanding my scope of attention. 

Something else that I’ve noticed about my blogs is that I tend to draw paralells to other ideas that exist outside the world of the play.  For example, in my first blog I related Antonio’s “Debbie downer” attitude to Orsino and Romeo’s demeanors in Twelfth Night and Romeo and Juliet, respectively.  In my second blog I connect cat-and-mouse nature of Petruccio and Katherine to a modern day scenario at a local college bar.  As a reader, this helps me to create a more well rounded interpretation of the writing.  Being provided with more than one image is helpful and stimulating. 

From the first to last, I believe that my blogs have developed a personal style that is unique to Ally.  I really value the opportunity to express exactly how I feel about anything I read.  There are no strict guidelines as to what I write about or how to write about it.  In addition, I am able to engage in a dialogue with other classmates regarding my post.  It is always cool to see how others respond and react towards your personal opinions and creative, analytical thoughts.  I aim to write my posts in a non-pretentious way that welcomes comments, arguing, and questions.    

Midterm Blogging

I like the blogging component of Shakespeare II. It allows us to compose our own mini theses and offer evidence to support our topics of interest. I like that there are so many ways we can go with it. I noticed that my first two blog posts were centered around people: intrapersonal and interpersonal conflict, while my third began focused on King Richard but then expanded to encompass the nation as a whole. This reoccurring focus on inner turmoil and interaction between characters may be me utilizing aspects from my psychology major. No outward action is independent of internal affect. I am interested in digging beneath characters’ actions to what’s going on in that character’s mind.
In my first blog post on The Merchant of Venice, I struggled to pick one topic to hone in on. It went from Antionio’s sadness and possible reasons for it, to husband and wife roles, to Antonio’s relationship with Shylock. It did not come together like it should have at the end. If I could go back I’d explore gender roles more, such as the different approaches men and women take to gain and exert power (Portia’s power was unique and interested me).
I would also explore gender roles in The Taming of the Shrew (my 2nd blog post). My post focused on Youth vs. Old age, which was an interesting topic, but the role of women is what truly stood out to me by the end of the play. I brought up the topic of domestic violence in class because Petruchio exhibited so many characteristics of an abuser (isolating her from her home, claiming ownership over her, and twisting her words/telling her she’s wrong no matter what). In addition, I would have liked to explore Baptista’s role in the play. He was somewhat passive and never involved in conflict unless it was triggered by his daughters. Everyone wanted to please him. The name “Baptista” reminded me of “baptism” as if all the suitors were looking to be baptized into the family by him. His character did not seem like a typical competitive male. A person performing a baptism, such as a priest, is usually calm and a side character in the actual family gathering at a Baptism.

Lastly, my most recent blog post on Richard II was the most effective so far. I think it’s beneficial to use an individual as a starting point, but more so if I factor him/her into the larger scenario. My post about King Richard related the personal disorder inside Richard to the disorder of the land itself, and it utilized evidence that the disorder was spreading to other, less significant families. This is the approach I will take for future blog posts because it keeps the specificity while expanding to encompass evidence under that specific umbrella, rather than widening the umbrella to encompass a variety of topics that can become confusing.

Blog Reflection

My first observation when looking back over my blog was that I had never actually posted my second entry. So, now that that error has been corrected, I can analyze the two and discuss my progress. My first post was focused primarily on characters in The Merchant of Venice. While I did some decent analysis of them, I definitely find that I could have looked a little deeper at Shylock and Bassanio. After discussions in class took place I found that I understood things much better and they were not included in that blog post, which is a bit of a shame.  I also didn’t really analyze much of the language in this post, with one exception, and in Shakespeare with language being such a big part of it that’s probably something I should make sure to do in the future.

My second blog post on Richard II was primarily focused on language so I found that I liked this post a bit better and it seemed a bit more focused. I will say however, that the first post was better in that it brought in more of the rest of the play than this one did, because I only discussed one scene in this post. This post however definitely seemed to have a more thorough understanding of the text involved which seems to keep it more on point and focused as there weren’t as many places that were full of speculation.

I definitely liked that we are being asked to look through our blogs and reflect on them, not least of all because I noticed the huge mistake I made and because it also just allows me to compare my work which gives me ideas for future blog entries that I might try out.  I also enjoy the response portion of these blogs because reading other ideas is also a good way to get new thoughts flowing.

Richard II

                Act III, Scene 2 of Richard II offers a lot of very interesting passages which can be looked at in great depth. In particular, Richard himself seems to use a great deal of powerful language in this scene which when analyzed closely is clearly very well crafted and holds powerful meaning. Right from the start of the scene, Richard speaks in long drawn out phrases that are more like speeches than anything else whenever he addresses those around him, and he is very cryptic about most of what he has to say.  Richard seems very self-assured about his position as King but at the same time whenever he receives bad news he is downright overcome by it all in a way. When the group first arrives at their destination, Richard is very confident in his speech, speaking to the earth itself and using powerful language to tell it that he is sorry that his enemies have been there but now all shall be well because he has arrived. He says that “weeping, smiling greet I thee my earth, / and do thee favours with my royal hands” (3.2.10-11). This self-assured statement of promise to the ground is very interesting and shows a lot about where his mind is set at the time.

                However, as the scene progresses Richard’s demeanor changes quite a lot and it is yet again reflected in his intricate language. After he begins to find out more about exactly what Bolingbroke has been up to and how Bolingbroke has been growing stronger, he gets a bit more unsettled, but remains calm. He ends his next speech by saying that “Weak men must fall; for heaven still guards the right” (3.2.58). This statement shows not only his faith in himself and his men but in his God, as he still believes that he has the divine right to rule and that no matter what happens this will overcome all opposition. Still, the conversation continues and Scrope makes Richard fully aware of all that has occurred. Finally, towards the end of the scene, Richard seems to finally get into the angry, worried place he needs to be in order to deal with the situation. He utters phrases like “Make dust our paper and with rainy eyes/ Write sorrow on the bosom of the earth” (3.2.142-143) and “the death of kings-/ how some have been deposed, some slain in war, … some poisoned by their wives, some sleeping killed, / all murdered” (3.2.152-156). Both of these use incredibly powerful imagery. The first sentence expresses great pain and displays crying as an action which includes the earth which not so long ago in the scene he was promising things to, and the second declaration is even more powerful. Richard discusses the ends of Kings in a way that shows he almost has accepted that his reign may truly be coming to an end.  He talks of the deaths of kings and includes natural deaths but labels them as murder, which is an incredible thought to ponder, and yet again his language has such power here that despite his realizations and his growing fears he still seems powerful.

Mid Term: Reflection of the Blog

Sam Adler

Mid Term Blog

 

My blogs are all similar in the fact they discuss the fight for power.  In Merchant there is a fight for power within the romantic triangle between Antonio, Bassianio, and Portia.  Then in Taming there is a power struggle for who gets to marry the shrew in order for the more prized lady (Bianca).  In my blog I note the animalistic way this play is described and said that " They are like small dogs barking very loudly and are trying to look very scary but everyone knows they wouldn't burst a grape in a food fight."  That quote is actually from my blog about Richard the second but it aptly describes how Shakespeare has his characters interact.  In all the plays there is a fight for who deserves something more than the other person.  Whether it be land, lady, money, power, or rights Shakespeare has all his characters be strong characters as to have the reader question the ways of society during his time.  As Megan responded to my post she wrote "Shakespeare created a female character who has the gusto to speak back to men and state her opinion is ground breaking. This characteristic is what makes Shakespeare both a writer of his time and a writer of all times." I agree with that because he addresses issues that transcend his plays and touches people personally.  He has too many different characters for a reader not to find someone to relate to, or to remind them of something the reader has experienced before. 

I feel that my blog post have changed for that fact that I know more Shakespeare's themes and ideas better.  I can relate it back to previous readings we've had and see how he uses his writing for irony, foreshadowing, and commenting on the times.  I feel that the blogging has helped me interact with my classmates more and try and tackle Shakespeare by myself.  I am not one who came in this class liking Shakespeare all that much and this experience has helped me understand him better than I have before in all my teachings of him.  This Mid-Term blog is great because it makes everyone revisit their work and see what people commented so the dialogue continues and grows. 

I think that themes that I can revisit is the concept of: hunger for power vs responsibility of power.  In Henry 5th we see the hunger for power lead Harry to be a great Henry.  But will his power consume him? Also there will be more discussions about religion, politics, law, and morality all tied together with Shakespeare shaping his plays to have us question which of those are more powerful than the others, and then thinking about our own society and questioning which has the most power.  I'm excited to keep the conversation between our class and Shakespeare's works continuing, and learning how to use the blogs better. 

Looking Back And Reflecting

     During the course of this class I have made blog posts on three plays; Henry IV, Richard II, and The Merchant Of Venice. Looking back on my blog posts I realized that they each had a unique way of looking at the text. Two of the blog posts commented on the actions of the main characters in the play and my own interpretation of why Shakespeare would have this happen and how I would feel as the character during that part of the play. The other blog post that I wrote was about the language that I noticed Shakespeare used in the play. I tried to determine why Shakespeare might have done this and what it meant.

     I have found some high and low point of my blog post that I have posted during the course of the semester. I noticed that my blog posts were a lot about analyzing the characters and their actions in the play. This is not necessarily a bad thing I have just noticed that I lean a lot towards that. I always seem to try to put myself in the position of the characters and how I would act upon the situations in the scene. Thinking about it more I probably could have gone the extra mile by really breaking down the actions of the characters and what it would mean to other characters by the actions taken. I guess that I picked these parts in the blog posts "Equally Divided?" and "You Want To Do What?!?" because these sections that I discussed really left me with a lot of inner questions. These questions were kind of like the ones you would think about during a predictable scary movie; "Why are you going in the closet?" "Why would she walk down that dark alley way alone?" things that characters did that seemed so stupid you had to make a comment on it. The blog post "Why All The Rhyme?" was more of a above and beyond type of post because I analyzed the writing and not just the characters in the play. I took the time to look at the writing and the devices used by Shakespeare to analyze why he would use them and why in those specific parts of the scene in the play. 

       I have to say that I have really been enjoying making posts on this blog. At first I thought it would just be another assignment to worry about, but I have really grown to like it. I enjoyed analyzing the plays not for just what was going on but for what interested me in the reading. I also enjoyed analyzing the blog posts that I have already made. It made me realize my high and low points and the direction I did not even know I was taking by always asking questions about the actions of the characters in each play. I guess I could say that I found my comfort zone in my blogging. I would like to say that I will try to go out of this comfort zone but I do find it really gravitating. Perhaps I could try to incorporate more of the analyzing of writing in my blog posts to give them more depth. Overall this really has been an enjoyable experience for me and I am excited to see what the new plays will bring out in my blog posts since they will not be history based plays. 

Backtracking

In my own posts, I often see that I analyze the relationships between two characters. Whether it is between Hotspur and Glyndwr, Antonio and Shylock, or John of Gaunt and just about everyone else in the play or God. The relationships between people affect how I see and read the play so they are very important for me to analyze. I had not noticed that I had focused on that before this, and it is interesting to see how much I focus on the partnerships between two people when I am reading through the scenes of the plays that we have read in class.

In reading through my first post that deals with the beginning of Act four in The Merchant of Venice and the relationship between Antonio and Shylock. It focuses mainly on how Shylock is painted out to be the villain, and Antonio is the hero. I was glad of the examples that I painted out of Shylock’s wickedness, and the quotation used to further along the portrayal of Shylock as the villain. However, reading through it I do wish that I had gotten further into Antonio as the hero to better compare the two and make the portrayal of Shylock as the villain and Antonio as the hero. If Antonio’s portrayal had been stronger it would have made the comparison stronger.

As I went on, to my next post, I noticed that I did get stronger in my analysis of the relationships between characters, even if the second deals mainly with John of Gaunt against more than just one person. It was nice to see my use of outside research, such as what I used to delve into the number seven and the tale of Cain and Abel which I didn’t know before writing the post. I believe I paid more attention to details in this post and felt more passionate about what I had written in this post. More than in the post before, this one also delves into the inner conflict of the character. Conflicts between characters and within them appears to be the theme of many of my posts this semester and I believe this post was my best moment at that theme. The two quotations within this post further along the argument and aren’t just there to fill up space, which is nice.

While the third post is not the strongest of my three, I believe that it delved nicely into the relationship between Hotspur and Glyndwr. I also believed that it used this relationship to relate to the entire play, with Hotspur’s temper and the way that the rebellion would not succeed. I do wish that I had delved more into this because I believe it would have been a more in depth and successful post had I done that. While it was a successful post within itself, I believe that there was a deeper analysis that I just barely touched on a few times.

I value these weekly blogs because in these blogs, I have to really dig deeply into the play and find the deeper meanings and themes within it. It allows for analysis and for me to be able to really find what it is that I have a tendency to notice when I read the plays. It allows for reading on Shakespeare, which can be difficult to do at times, in shorter bursts than huge essays, though it does help in finding what would make good topics for said huge essays, and makes it a more enjoyable task.

Midterm Blog

What I have found from reading over my blogs is that I generally focus on one important thing that stuck out to me during my readings.  I try to choose a topic that interests me so that I can really analyze it and maybe take a new spin on what Shakespeare is trying to say, or make an inference about what I find in the text.  I didn't really find too much of a reoccurring theme in my blogs, but what I do realize is that I focus on one specific part of the text and then expand from there.  They don't seem to be too much about broad themes.  I feel like when analyzing Shakespeare, you really need to focus on one small piece of the text because there is so much vibrant language that it is easy to elaborate on only a few lines.  Focusing on a full scene or event that took place would give me too much to work with and my blog would not be as focused.
I actually discovered while doing this blog that I received multiple comments on both of my blogs (there were only two online because I wasn't able to upload the first one due to technical problems).  I hadn't known that any of them were commented on and it was wonderful to look back on what I wrote and see so many comments.  This makes me feel like I was going in the right direction with the ideas that I raised because they encouraged discussion for the rest of the class.  One of the aims that I had doing my blogs was to bring a new idea to the table or to ask a question, so that readers could engage in them more easily.
For example, my blog called "The Unruly Son" questions if King Henry IV was right in putting so much pressure on his son, Hal or if this was just going to force Hal away from the throne even more.  I felt like his comparison to Richard was very shocking and harsh, while others commented that they believed that the king only had Hal's best interests in mind.  My other blog called "A Lack of Imagination"  brought up the idea that Richard II is a very masculinocentric play which contributes to the characters turning away from the imagination, which is so important in theatre.  I got a lot of responses about the masculinity in the play and how Shakespeare is a "sexless" writer who gives masculine and feminine sides to every character.  These responses make me feel very satisfied with my blog posts because they show my classmates' interest in the topics I bring up.
The one thing I can criticize about my blogs is that they could be more fully developed and a little longer so that I can fully get my point across in the way that I want, while using more supporting evidence.  Looking back on my blogs really helped me so that I can shape the ones that I do for the rest of the semester and make sure that they are developed as much as they can be and are focused on exactly what I'd like to say. 

Blog Reflection

I have noticed in my posts that I usually write about characters in the plays we are reading in order to explore the themes discussed in class.

The first post I did on The Merchant of Venice I focused on Portia and Shakespeare’s choice to put her in man’s clothes to give her power in the court room. The aspect of power is so important in that play, and the juxtaposition of power within the different characters in the play is fascinating, especially because women were supposed to be the weaker sex. I chose to write about Portia because she is one of my favorite characters in the play and she exemplifies the power dynamic in Merchant. As I wrote in my blog “Portia is clearly a strong female character in the first acts, but her gender allows her to be controlled. When she puts on the male clothes she takes control of the courtroom as soon as she enters it”, I focused on the transformation of her character in this post as I do in my other posts. I think Shakespeare’s character development is amazing; he can illustrate a whole theme of a play through one character’s growth. Portia’s power when she is dressed as a man is so different from her powerlessness when she is forced to endure the suitors and powerlessness vs. having power is a central theme throughout Merchant.

I looked at the different character relationships in Richard II as well to explore the idea of Richard being a bad king. In this post I used the footnote in the Norton to explore the idea of a familial pride since Lions are supposed to be the symbol of the king. I combined Shakespeare’s imagery with his interesting character dynamics in Richard II. I think I was struck by the Pride image so much because I like animals and the lines in Richard II about the lions and the leopards made me think about the actual animals Shakespeare wanted his characters to represent. I thought this would be fun aspect to explore. As in the post about Portia I focused on the characters to not only keep them all straight (because there were several in the history plays) but because Richard’s transformation in the play is amazing. He goes from a king abusing his power to a powerless man who realizes that he is not any different any other man. He needs to lose all his power to become human. After re-reading my blog about Richard II I realized that there is a definite theme of transformation in this play as well as in Henry IV.

Again I focused on the characters in the play to explore the main themes Shakespeare presented. I looked at the relationship between Prince Harry and his father King Henry. Transformation is a huge theme in this play; Hal must transform himself from frivolous prince to someone who deserves to be king. In my blog I focus on the difference of relationships between Harry and Henry and Harry and Falstaff; the characters’ relationships illustrate Harry’s own character in the first part of the play. He seems closer with Falstaff and closer to the Tavern world, but his character is drastically changed in the next play. Harry’s transformation is chronicled through his relationships with others.

I think I like to write about characters to explore the themes in Shakespeare’s plays because he has such rich and true to life characters. They really do jump off the page and come alive for me and I understand the themes more when they are discussed in terms of the characters and their actions. Portia and Kate both represent the struggle of women and the powerlessness surrounding them because they are both strong and witty characters. I relate to them both, and I can access both of their plays because of their portrayal. Richard II and his cold calculating nature is such a contrast to the Pride of lion’s image that I saw in my head so it makes it much easier to see the themes of power abuse and what happens when the crown poisons a ruler’s mind. This makes Richard’s fall even more monumental and I can understand how he must feel when he suddenly realizes that even a king is merely a man. Harry’s seeking of approval of his father was totally relatable to me and that’s why I latched onto that. What kid doesn’t want their parent’s approval? And Harry’s promise to redeem himself to his father is the catalyst for his character’s transformation which is a huge theme in Henry IV and Henry V. Shakespeare uses all his characters as vessels for his themes, and his characters are so awesome they can’t be ignored. They practically demand to be blogged about.          

Midterm Meta-blog!

In all three of my posts I focus on the theme of power. I explore how main characters display the power that he or she feels they are worthy of. This assumed power often turns on the character leaving he or she to be restored in some way. In King Richards’ case, death was his restoration. Shylock abused his power and in the end was humiliated and his power taken away. Sly puffs his feathers up, for the waitress in the tavern scene, who immediately puts him in his place (and since she is a woman it is even more powerful).

After reading all of my posts I found that I focus on a broad theme and see how it applies to different aspects of the play. Shakespeares’ writing is so faceted that this approach makes the most sense to me. I know that Shakespeare wouldn’t introduce a theme in the beginning of a play and then never refer back to that theme. If he introduced it then it is totally worth exploring. It is that point in time where I become a detective and question the motives of all the characters and how they relate to the theme I have in mind It is interesting to see certain elemnts in my writing because I never realized that was how I approached Shakespeare.

I found that in my first post I really focused on a broad theme and analyzed it thoroughly. This was my first blogging experience and the first time I had seen Shakespeare in a long time. I think I stuck to that theme out of fear that I would digress if I didn’t, but it turned out to be a very successful approach. My next two posts did focus on a broad theme but they were a little less thorough and targeted. While I did have many elements that brought in a common theme, I also explored different elements of the text. In my later blogs I talk about language a bit and even tie two themes together. I think that I was becoming a bit more comfortable with the text but I feel that I should have explored the theme as thoroughly I had in my first blog (which was out of apprehension). My later blogs are a bit more exploratory. I thought that I was progressing but it seems I should have stuck to my instinctual method that I displayed in the first blog.

It is definitely worth it to examine our own blogs in this way. Other people read and post to them but it isn’t often that I revisit one of my older blogs. This forum is a comfortable and safe atmosphere where people can share ideas. It is a place where students can focus on what they want to focus. There is no one telling us what to comment on either. I find myself reading through many posts in order to find one I am most interested in. there also seems to be just enough writing with the blogs. It is something that is easy to read and the opposite of stressful.

Culmination: From Tavern to Throne

Henry V is the culmination of Harry’s journey from Prince Hal to King Henry. We see his maturation from frivolous prince to a crafty and just ruler. He keeps the things he learned from the taverns in mind; he uses games to control people, and he relies on the rhetoric he learned in the taverns but he uses these techniques to manipulate situations to his advantage for the sake of his country now.

We see him use the Tavern training in his entrapment of the three traitors, Cambridge, Scrope, and Grey. He more or less gets them to seal their own fate when they advise him to show mercy on the supposed drunk man. Scrope tells Henry, “Let him be punished, sovereign, lest example / Breed, by his sufferance, more of such a kind.” (2.2.45-46). In order to be seen as a tough ruler Henry must weed out any traitors in his court, even if they are some of his dearest friends. Scrope even tells him you need to punish the drunken rebel so no more will speak out against you; he basically tells Henry you need to kill us to make sure there will be no other traitors against you. And Henry uses the clever rouse of giving them power in his absence, but it is really their execution notices. He needs to be elaborate and scary with the deaths of the traitors to scare others, to show them he is no longer Prince Hal, but now King Henry and traitors will be punished. His Tavern training has prepared him for such clever political games; however, in the very next scene 2.3, we learn that Henry has removed himself completely from the tavern life to be King. The death of John Falstaff is not staged, the audience learns of it through the Hostess Quickly. This is an interesting choice on Shakespeare’s part. I think he does it to really cement the fact that Falstaff is no longer apart of the play because he is no longer a part of Harry’s life. In order to be an effective King and to be taken seriously Harry had to leave his Tavern days behind him but he took everything he learned there and uses it to his advantage.    

Even on the battlefield he uses his ability to talk to all types of people that he mastered in the taverns. He makes inclusive and inspiring speeches to his men to get them to rally behind him. Henry eloquently assures his men of the glory they will receive because of the war, he says, “But we in it should be remembered, / We few, we happy few, we band of brothers. / For he today that shat sheds his blood with me / Shall be my brother; be he ne’er so vile”(4.3. 59-62). His speech is beautiful as well as powerful. Shakespeare writes this speech formally because the King is addressing his men, but when Henry secretly goes out to talk with his men in a disguise he easily slips back into the prose speech from the taverns proving that he can truly talk to anyone in any given situation. This rhetorical device is a great tool for a king to master. Henry can use language to manipulate situations to avoid violence as well. In Act 3 Scene 3 when Henry calls for the surrender of Harfleur he uses such graphic and violent imagery, he tells the governor, if you do not surrender to me then my men will get so caught up in the fervor of war and being a solider that they will defile your daughters, kill your fathers and put your infants on pikes. Henry’s language makes it seem like it will be the governor’s fault his town is destroyed if he does not surrender. But Henry is bluffing, he tells Exeter, “Use mercy on them all” (3.3. 131). In the Branagh film we watched Henry looks relieved that the governor surrendered. Henry’s ability to use language as a tool is no different from what politicians do today.

All of these traits make Henry a sound and just ruler. He really has reformed himself from Prince Hal to King Henry; capable of making difficult decisions for the good of his country, able to talk to and inspire all types of people, and with a command of language that gives him a great advantage in battle. All these attributes that make him a great ruler he learned in the taverns proving that he really did need those experiences to prepare him for his role as king.     

Midterm Blog!

                I found reflecting on my three blog posts from this semester to be an interesting and beneficial task.  While not everything thrilled me about my writing, I did discover some proper usage of quotations and appealing, contextual themes.  My example of antitheses in the Merchant post made me cheerful as I enjoy when Shakespeare utilizes this literary tool, and I am happy I picked up on it.  A quote from this blog reveals an example of opposites: “[Portia’s] weariness stems from her father’s ‘cold decree’ and her ‘hot temper’ clashing.” This jumped out at me as I reread.  Antitheses are something I would like to focus on more when I read different works of Shakespeare.  He truly captures the duality of Portia’s feelings in act one, scene two of Merchant, and reading my post again helped me to see this clearly.  As with all rereading of any old writing, it helps to see how we can improve with our grammar and sentence structure.  My post on Merchant contained awkward sentences that I hope I can improve on. 

As for the thematic quality of my blogs, I noticed that two of the three dealt with sympathies towards female characters, while my most frequent post focused on divine right and Christianity.  Merchant and Taming have an extra emphasis on the female compared to Richard II, so this is most likely why all three posts did not focus on women characters in Shakespeare.  As I revisited, I realized how much I enjoy studying and writing on the female players.  In works that generally are male dominated, I find it important to not forget the female characters who often lead to major insights and themes. Christian symbolism is another interest of mine, which is why this was my blog’s theme for Richard II.  I suppose I could have focused on the garden scene with the queen to have all three posts female-centered.  I did find the characters of Portia and Katherine much more fascinating compared to the queen’s character.  These women felt more dynamic and explored compared to Richard’s wife.  I would definitely choose to write on Katherine and Taming if forced to pick out of my three posts for an assignment.  Even with her complexity and brashness, I find Kate extremely sympathetic.  A quote from my Taming post sums up how I feel about poor Katherine:  “… I still consider [Kate] to be misunderstood and an emotive woman that should not be ignored by anyone, including the audience, Baptista, or potential suitors.”  My compassionate view towards her could definitely lend itself to a feminist reading of Taming, which has been done numerous times, but is something I would consider exploring further. 

These blogs are useful tools for close reading of the play’s text and are great practices for writing on Shakespeare.  What I valued most about these blogs was the ability to write solely on what was of interest to me.  My main area of concentration ended up being on the women of the Shakespeare we have read in class thus far.  The blog is a great start for thinking of paper topics and for simply diving into a theme we have not fully covered in class but desire to explore in more depth.  I enjoyed the process of analyzing the text and rereading my posts and comments for this midterm blog.    

Midterm Blog

          Of my three posts, two were close readings and one was a bit of a rant inspired by a specific passage.

         My first post made me a cringe a little bit while reading it. Such clunky language! “Applicability”? I made some interesting points about Shakespeare’s use of aphorisms, but they weren’t all too clear until I remembered what I was trying to say.

         My second post made me cringe, too, but only because I said things like “Is Shakespeare telling us something?!!” To me, that seems like fluff and should be left out my blog posts. It’s absolutely valid to wonder whether Shakespeare is telling us something, but I think my blog posts should be proof enough that I am already wondering!

         I’m still proud of the third post, and I think it’s my best. It’s more organized than the first post, and it poses more interesting questions and comes to more interesting conclusions.

I think I do best my blogging when I isolate a particular passage and then pose questions about it. I don’t think Shakespeare’s work is impossible to comprehend, but reading so much of it can be overwhelming. So much of reading Shakespeare at this level is just trying to figure what he’s saying, and I don’t just mean to say “it’s like he’s using another language.” Every word in Shakespeare has weight. That’s why I think it’s helpful to isolate a specific passage, analyze it, and then pose questions about how it relates to the work as a whole. When I do this, I feel like I’m becoming more “fluent” in Shakespeare. I wish I had the time to do a close reading of every play line by line.

I like that the blog gives me an opportunity to do close readings. I also appreciate how I can voice concerns through the blog, like I did in my post about The Taming of the Shrew. I liked posting about my concerns with TS because I found it difficult to do so in class. I liked being able to take the time to think about what was so frustrating about that play and articulate it fairly well. Like I said before, it’s hard to tell how Shakespeare wants his readers to react to his plays. Mulling things over helps sort out the confusion and the impulse to redeem Shakespeare. I think my posts show that, when given the opportunity, I can do some great analytical thinking.

I would like to do more close reading posts, as well as posts that focus on historical context. I’d like my writing to approve with these posts. I think as I get more comfortable with Shakespeare, my writing on him should get better. 

Midterm Blog

   Over the past semester I have written three blogs about some of the plays that we have read for this class, these plays include The Merchant of Venice, The Taming of the Shrew, and the first part of Henry IV. As the semester has progressed I have written these blogs based on aspects of these plays that I have either found very interesting and/or were central to the play overall. After re-reading and analyzing all of my blogs I have come to see that there are several very good parts to all of them, and some weaker parts to them. There is also a recurring theme in all of my writing, mainly that of looking beyond what something outwardly appears as.
   Throughout all of the blogs that I have written there have been strengths and weaknesses, the first of which is "Logic in the Coffins" which I wrote about the scenes of choosing the coffins for Portia's hand in marriage in The Merchant of Venice. In my blog I paid special attention to the main suitors that vied for Portia's hand and their specific reasoning for choosing the coffin that they chose. I made sure to write about the way that each of the coffins would have been seen by these suitors and use the fact that they all had varying levels of value and how that would have played into their decision making. That being said I did spend a little too much time discussing the gold coffin, whereas I could have been discussing the other two coffins in greater detail. This is something that I was able to fix in my next post, "Clothes Make the Man" which I wrote about the use of clothing in The Taming of the Shrew. In this blog I made sure to give an appropriate amount of time discussing the way that clothes in this time period were used to identify social status and wealth, also indirectly giving them a certain degree of power based solely on the clothes that they were wearing. This is one of my better posts in terms of detail and evidence for my claims, though I could have used more explanation of the evidence I used. Finally there is the blog "Appearances vs Reality" that I wrote about the first part of Henry IV, in which I discuss the various ways that what something appears to be can be very different from what is real. I do this mainly through the way that several characters use false appearances in their political machinations. As I looked at this blog and past ones I have come to realize that a common theme in all of them is that the initial appearance of something may be, and is in fact probably, very different from what it really is. This is seen in the use of the coffins in which the coffin with the lowest value had the greatest reward, the clothes a person wears may signal something that is quite different, and that appearances are willing changed from reality to aid someone in their political games.
   Throughout this semester I have written a few blogs in which I have discussed the themes that I found important to each play. All of the blogs I have written dealt in one way or the other how something that may appear to be one way can be completely different, whether it is something that appears to be worth a great deal or completely worthless. All of my blogs have been written in a way that is able to convey my arguments using evidence that supports them.

Midterm Blog

When re-reading my posts for this blogging assignment I was sure that I was not going to be able to find any connecting details. I feared there would be nothing to talk about, but it seems to be that there is one specific detail that connects all of my posts. I seem to talk a lot about deceit and looking beyond what is obvious. If I was to dive deeper into understanding my own blog posts I am very concerned about the character development within the plays.

When looking at my posts I focused on one character instead of an overall theme or plot. I was also curious in understanding the drive behind the character’s actions. What drove the character to do as they did or to act as they were? Was there something that Shakespeare was alluding to or was this a complete accident that he never meant to create within his plays. I was shocked that I was that specific, that consistent with the specifics of character development within all of my posts. My only reasoning behind that is due to the fact that I have been taking so many Creative Writing classes; I have been concerned with my own character development so I am concerned about the character development within anyone’s writing.

When re-reading my posts there are certain things that I am very happy that I accomplished. Within all the posts I brought up questions but I never solved any of them, in fact I probably raised more questions with each post. I am not about to assume that I know what Shakespeare intended within his plays/characters. I believe that the audience will never know his true intentions and should never assume such. The one question that I would re-visit would be the character of Shylock in Merchant of Venice.

            Should we sympathize with this character or he someone that we should fear and hate. While we are aware of the cultural situation surrounding him during this time period I am never sure as to whether or not we can truly understand his reasoning for claiming the flesh of another man. While yes, he “is human like them, bleeds like them and cries like them” I am not sure whether or not they are as equally vicious as he becomes in the middle of this play. This is a question that I will still be grappling with even after this semester ends.

Mid-point Reflection

Upon reading my three blog posts I have noticed a central theme – I have made my focus for each blog so far on Shakespeare’s characters by examining their behaviors throughout the plays.  In my very first blog post, “Quibbling over Shakespeare’s Characters – Portia & Shylock,” I wrote about my personal feelings regarding these two characters in The Merchant of Venice, Portia especially.  I questioned Portia’s strength as a female character because of her submission to her deceased father’s will regarding her marriage, despite her unhappiness with the conditions he set in place to choose a husband for her.  At this point in the play, nothing about Portia suggested independence or cleverness, and I expressed my disappointment in her, and also my hope in seeing her redeem herself.  I then progressed to discussing Shylock, and commented on how Shakespeare depicted him within the play to fit the stereotypes of Jewish people.  I questioned whether or not Shakespeare was trying to portray Shylock in a negative light because of personal prejudice, or if he was merely depicting Shylock in as much of a realistic manner as possible to try to authenticate his work.  I’ll admit this blog isn’t as tightly focused as it should have been, and looking at it now I see what I would do differently.  I would focus on either Portia or Shylock, not both, which would have made my post more concrete.  Also, by setting up my blog this way, I would have been able to do a more thorough analysis of either Portia or Shylock.  I noticed also that this blog was very subjective and focused mostly on my feelings on the characters, and not so much of a deep analysis of them.       

            In my second blog post, “Conflicting Thoughts on Katherine,” I reveal my contradictory feelings toward this character in The Taming of the Shrew.  Through analyzing Katherine, I began to generate the causes for her shrewish behavior, namely her jealousy toward her sister.  After deducing the reason for her provocative behavior, I found myself at an impasse at attempting to reach a conclusion about her as a character.  Katherine is initially portrayed to be a woman who actively engages others in power plays through her use of language, and it doesn’t seem like any man can pierce her stubborn, confrontational, ill-temperament.  Through the process of Petruccio courting her Katherine’s strong-willed self seems to disintegrate.  After the wedding, Katherine seems like a completely different character, resembling her original self very little, if at all.  Petruccio becomes the domineering one as his fiery temperament and his method of “taming” her by denying her food and sleep leads her to submit to his will.  I feel this blog was a bit more focused than my first one, despite the fact it was subjective like the first blog.  Nonetheless, it is evident that I had began to steer away from subjectivity, if only slightly.  Even though I had focused on the same topic (Shakespeare’s characters) I approached the theme from a slightly different angle.  There were moments in which I strayed a bit seemed repetitious with my deductions, especially regarding the causes for Katherine’s aggression and ill-temper, but all in all it was a better post than my first one. 

            The third and final blog I submitted also focuses on one of Shakespeare’s characters – King Richard in the play Richard II.  In this blog entry I analyzed King Richard’s behavior during his resignation and Bolingbroke’s coronation.  Richard’s persona was unbecoming to me – he was so downtrodden and dwelled on the fleeting nature of his kingship.  This continued throughout the entirety of the scene, and instead of making me feel remorseful I mentioned how it made me dislike him more than I already did to begin with.  I commented on his unwillingness to resign, despite his obvious failures as a king, and how ridiculous his behavior was.  This post was by far the most focused and reflected my deep analysis of Richard’s character throughout the scene.  While I incorporated my personal feelings toward the deposed king (especially evident in the title of my post), I conducted a thorough analysis of King Richard’s character through exploring the text.    

            After reflecting on all my work thus far I can see that, while all my posts have focused on Shakespeare’s characters, there is a noticeable progression in terms of how focused and thoughtful each post is.  Each post reveals a deeper thought process on my part.  Also, each blog addresses the characters in a different way, so it doesn’t seem repetitive.  The first blog is very subjective, whereas the final blog reveals some subjectivity, but also a decent amount of objectivity.  Next, I noticed that my titles gradually seemed more original with each blog I wrote.  The first blog announces my topic in a very straight-forward way, not revealing any creativity.  My final post, however, is much more imaginative and fresh – it announces my topic without stating in a matter-of-fact way.  This reveals how I have become more comfortable writing these blog entries since the beginning of the semester.  I really have enjoyed this blogging experience because it has allowed me to express my thoughts and feelings on the plays we have read and also has enabled me to pose questions and see other classmates’ interpretations.  By receiving feedback on my blog posts, and having the opportunity to comment on others’ entries, I truly believe I have developed an open-mindedness regarding Shakespeare’s works.  By being open to others’ insights and ideas, I have enjoyed exploring his plays.  I think that any of the topics I blogged about would be worth revisiting because I have gained an appreciation of the many angles I can take in examining Shakespeare’s works.