Maeve's Meta-Post

After re-reading my previous posts, I think my key topic for blog postings have been character motivations.  The characters that I favor in Shakespeare are generally the enigmatic evil-doers and the clever fools: I loved Iago and Feste (I didn’t write about him, but I thought about him), and I was very interested in trying to piece together their personal philosophies and the ways they justify their own actions.  In my last blog post, I was really intrigued by how Othello translated into opera, and particularly how that affected the portrayal of Iago.

Another point of interest for me has been gender relations and female autonomy.  Reading my first post, in which I briefly touched on Egeus’ accusation that Lysander had “bewitched” Hermia into loving him in A Midsummer Night's Dream, it reminded me of Brabantio making the same accusation to Othello.  Though I had only really considered this accusation in terms of it’s ridiculousness, another way to look at it is as a reflection of the way women are though of and treated within these plays.  The idea that a woman would have to be bewitched to choose a suitor that her father disproved of (and, in a way, the idea that a woman might be bewitched at all/so easily) suggests that women have no autonomy and are thought to be unable to think for themselves.  

Of all my posts, my favorite was the one I wrote about Verdi’s Otello.  When I was posting it, I felt like there was a lot more I wanted to say but I had to cut myself off so I wouldn’t write an epicly lengthy post that no one would want to read.  I think one of the best ways for me to think about Shakespeare is by comparing different adaptations, as seeing interpretations of the plays help me conceptualize characterizes and scenes in ways I wouldn’t have otherwise.  

I think the biggest flaw with my blog posts overall is that they lack focus and organization, though I think this has improved slightly with each successive post.  My first post started out with no real thesis other than general confusion, but luckily turned out as a meditation on gender within A Midsummer Night’s Dream.  In the latter two posts I think I had a better idea of what I wanted to write about, but they still read as being a bit unorganized and my latest post ended abruptly without a conclusion.  In my future posts, I think I ought to put more time into outlining the points I want to make in my posts, so I don’t lose track of what I want to say and how I’m saying it.

The Performance of the Play Within the Play

   
One thing that I found particularly interesting about Act V was the witty way in which Shakespeare presents the performance of the play within the play. He creates an interesting dynamic given the interaction between the upper and lower classes (the audience and the players/mechanicals) which is appropriate given that the play takes place midsummer--one of the few times classes are mixed together. Shakespeare also works to make the performance of a tragedy, into a scene appropriate for a comedy. The way I see it, there are two main factors that make Act V the most humorous act in the play. The way in which the play is presented by the rude mechanics is comical, and a bit unorthodox. They begin the performance with a prologue that essentially states everything that is going to happen in the play which may have been necessary for the audience given the amount of interruptions that occur throughout the performance, although it is a pretty brief, simple play. Right away, before the actors even take the stage, there is criticism from the audience about the poor grammar in the prologue which is humorous given the accuracy of the criticisms, but it also works to illustrate the differences of education between the upper and lower classes.

After the first part of the prologue, Theseus remarks: “This fellow doth stand upon points.” Lysander and Hippolyta express that they find the prologue to be presented in an uneducated, ineffective manner which takes away from its intended purpose and sets a bad first impression for the players/rude mechanicals. Lysander says: “He hath rid his prologue like a rough colt; he knows not the stop. A good moral, my lord: it is not enough to speak, but to speak true” (V.i.114-16). Hippolyta follows with a similarly superior attitude stating: “Indeed he hath played on this prologue like a child on a recorder; a sound, but not in government” (V.i.117-19). Lysander and Hippolyta, in particular, seem to have negatively inferior views of the actors of the lower class even before the prologue, thus the improper grammar in the prologue does not help the actors gain respect. When informed that they are going to see a play performed by, according to Philostrate, “Hard-handed men that work in Athens here, / Which never labored in their minds till now,” Hippolyta reacts negatively while Theseus insists that it can’t be that bad if it is done by hard working men (V.i.66-68). Throughout the performance, the members of the audience make various comments on the production. Their feelings of superiority are shone through their comments at times and add to the humor of the scene. In the end, they enjoy the silly performance of the tragedy of Pyramus and Thisbe which, in a sense, shows the breaking down of barriers between the classes.

Thoughts About Act V

Personally, I have never been much of a Shakespeare fan. Just the sound of his name has frightened me in the past. The language can be so difficult to understand that it is easy to be discouraged. Up to this point, though, I have found that A Midsummer Night’s Dream has not been as bad as I had originally prepared myself for. I find it quite interesting and the story is very entertaining to read. Unfortunately, Act V was quite disappointing. The play doesn’t end as I had hoped it would. In addition, I felt a little confused as I was reading. I would like to share some of the parts of Act V that I found disappointing or confusing.

                The beginning of Act V was okay, and I found the names of the plays Theseus had to choose from humorous (5.1 44-57). The first time I was confused occurred during the speech addressed by Quince. His speech is so poorly spoken that I had a hard time figuring out what was meant by it. Quince states, “We do not come as minding to content you, our true intent is. All for your delight we are not here” (5.1 112-115). Isn’t he practically saying that the actors are not here to make Theseus and the others happy? He states that the men are not here to delight their audience. As I was reading the speech, I thought I was reading something wrong or maybe even going crazy. As I continued to read, I realized that there is a purpose to this confusing and poorly written speech. I am assuming it is meant to be humorous to the audience who hear it spoken during a live performance of the play. I can imagine that it would have had a more positive effect on me had I heard it rather than read it. I wonder if this part of the play is really necessary.  Personally, I believe that reading something that is intended to be funny should not be confusing as well. It just takes away from the humor when too much time is spent being confused. That is especially true when reading the difficult language Shakespeare uses in his plays.

                I did find the play put on by the artisans to be funny and entertaining, as well as the comments made by the audience. What I didn’t like, though, is how Act V ends. I was hoping to have read about the wedding between the couples or whether or not Titania is angry about losing the boy to Oberon. These things just never came up. I wonder if there is a purpose as to why we never really get to the wedding. What could that purpose be? Did the wedding happen before the play was put on for them and we just weren’t told about it? I am very confused by this.

                Lastly, I really don’t like Puck’s Epilogue at the closing of the play. What does it mean? What purpose does it serve? He states, “And this weak and idle theme, no more yielding but a dream” (5.1 5-6). Are readers and audience members of the play meant to consider the play as a dream? I am just confused by this.

                Act V seemed to give me more trouble than any other acts but, overall, A Midsummer Night’s Dream was enjoyable to read.

The Deception of Eyes

In A Midsummer Night’s Dream, Shakespeare creates many definite symbols that represent the themes of love and the illusion of love through supernatural beings and objects such as cupid and the love potion. However, there is one symbol in which Shakespeare consistently changes the meaning to and that is the humanly symbol of eyes. Throughout the play Shakespeare makes many references to eyes, but although he mentions eyes to a grand total of forty-one times in his play, he does not give them a “definite” meaning of their usage.

In fact in Act V when the symbol of eyes is first introduced, it is represented as a symbol of the fidgeting and unrest in a mad man or a lover trying to find that love or the object that they desire.  The quote on page 886:

“One sees more devils than vast hell can hold,
That is, the madman: the lover, all as frantic,
Sees Helen's beauty in a brow of Egypt:
The poet's eye, in fine frenzy rolling,”

                                                                                (Shakespeare p. 886)

represents eyes as nothing more than just a mental image. But on page 887, the eyes are represented as an emotional response by Egeus to the play. The quote,

“Which, when I saw rehearsed, I must confess,
Made mine eyes water; but more merry tears
The passion of loud laughter never shed.”

                                                                                (Shakespeare p. 887)

shows the shifts of the function and symbol of the eyes. This is a completely different function and representation of the eyes in scene IV. In fact throughout scene four and even in the earlier scenes, the usage of eyes was primarily towards the lovers and the shifts that the lovers’ had towards one another.

When Puck laces the eyes of Lysander it is the function and symbols of the eyes to “fall in love” with the wrong person which is Helena. His eyes betray him which brings up the notion of eyes being deceptive. Furthermore it is the eyes in which all the characters that were fooled by the potion (Titania, Lysander, Demetrius) that had created for them the illusion of love towards Helena and Bottom. In fact there are many mentions of the eyes being veiled or “covered” in some way or the other. One moment in which the eyes are “covered” is how the potion is administered.

Puck does not administer the potion when they have their eyes open. No, in fact he does this when their eyes are closed and “covered.” He covers their eyes with potion when they are blinded by sleep.

The shifts in the symbol, eyes in Shakespeare’s A Midsummer Night’s Dream are, although puzzling, befitting. Love (as shallow as this may seem) is first developed through having some sight with that person. You have to see the person before you love them. But, it is the eyes that can create illusions and delusions on who you love as well. In fact the constant shift of functions and usage of eyes in this play speaks about the shifting and changing loves and plots in the play; demonstrating that eyes are not windows to our soul, but deceptive tools and slaves to our imagination and desires.

Oh, A "play within a play"

The final act of this play, is one that I was not expecting while I was reading the play. While I was hoping for a more Romeo and Juliet ending, I found this act to end the play on a more comical note. I want to mainly focus on act 5 scene 1 of the play. In class we have been talking a great deal about the significance of the "play within a play". At this particular moment in the play, Theseus is already married to Hippolyta and is looking to enjoy some entertainment that has been prepared for the occasion.
 I find it quiet comical that the options Theseus is given do not seem very appropriate for a wedding to begin with. The first option that Theseus reads aloud is about a battle between Hercules and the Centaurs (line 44-47). Not only is it a play about a battle, but it is "to be sung/ By an Athenian eunuch to the harp" (line 44-45). The most comical about this play is Theseus' reason for not wanting to see this play performed, "We'll none of that. That have I told my love" (line 46). It is not the gruesome realities of battle that leads to Theseus to opt against the play, it is because he told his new wife the story already.
The second choice that Theseus has is the play "The riot of the tipsy Bacchanals, Tearing the Thracian singer in their rage". Just the title of the play alone says that it is not very wedding like! Drunk individuals that rip a singer to shreds is not reason enough not to watch it on your wedding night for Theseus. No, his reason is that the play is old and he saw it the last time he came back from his conquer of Thebes. (line 50-51).
His third option is "The thrice three Muses mourning for the death of learning, late deceased in beggary". Now this play is probably the closest on the list to appropriate for a wedding, although not 100% the best choice, but Theseus says, "That is some satire, keen and critical, Not sorting with a nuptial ceremony" (line 53-55).
Finally, Theseus chooses the play that our "Hard-handed men that work in Athens" (line 72) have put together because it is a very sad and tradgic comedy. As I read this, I could not help but say to myself, "because that is just all kinds of perfect for a wedding!" 
Did anyone else find this moment of the play to be one of the most comical moments toward the end of the play?

Gender and Power

         There were many things I found perplexing in the first acts of A Midsummer Night's Dream.  I haven't seen the play performed in a while, but as I started reading I was expecting something very light.  So when Egeus starts begging for the "ancient privelege of Athens", I wasn't sure how seriously I should be taking it.  This situation, I suppose, is appropriate for the setting of the play, but at the same time I couldn't really factor it into what my understanding of the play as a whole.  Egeus says that Lysander has "bewitched" Hermia into loving him and thus disobeying Egeus' order that she marry Demetrius (I.i.21-38).  But what I don't understand is that if Egeus blames Lysander for brainwashing Hermia, why doesn't he beg that Lysander be punished?  Then, later, when Lysander accuses Demetrius of having made love to Helena and then leaving her, Theseus says he had heard about this but quickly forgot about it ("but being over-full of self affairs, my mind did lose it"- I.i.111-113).  Why is Demetrius not held accountable for his actions and why is Egeus so casual about something that could mean life or death for Hermia? This interaction seems to set up the gender hierarchy within the play, at least for the human characters.
           The relationship between Titania and Oberon suggests that division of power is not so clean cut in the faery kingdom.  Titania and Oberon's first interaction in the play displays a definite power struggle in which neither party seems to hold much power over the other.  That Titania denies Oberon the changeling boy "perforce" shows that she has power and can exert that power in spite of her husband (II.i.26).  Also, Titania's assertion that she must keep the boy to honor the relationship that she had with his mother shows that Titania values her friendship just as much or more than her relationship with her husband, displaying her autonomy.  Oberon's mischief with the love potion is a way to undermine the autonomy that Titania displays, and perhaps to assert a patriarchal power dynamic.

The Pursuit of Love

The central theme of A Midsummer Night's Dream is love and its powerful force. The female characters Hermia and Helena show what they would do in their pursuit of love. For Hermia, I thought she stood her ground with her father when she refused to marry Demetrius. She states in 1.1.79-82, “So will I grow, so live, so die, my lord/Ere I will yield my virgin patent up/Unto his lordship whose unwished yoke/My soul consents not to give sovereignty” (851). Hermia shows she would rather risk death than to be forced to marry someone she doesn't love. It was courageous of her to run away to the woods with Lysander. I was a bit surprised by her prudish behavior with him when they meet because she states in 2.2.63 “Lie further off, in humane modesty” (863). I thought because she fought to be with him there would be more passion for between them. She shows she is still somewhat concerned about how she may appear and this shows she has modesty. It shows that although she is defying her father she still has respect for herself. Modesty is not a word I would use to describe Helena in her pursuit of Demetrius. I was embarrassed to read about her antics when she was interacting with Demetrius. She didn't seem concerned that she was making a fool out of herself especially as she was running after him in Scene Two, Act Two. I also thought she was being devious when she plans to run and tell Demetrius about Hermia and Lysander running off; hoping“To have his sight thither and back again” (854). Why does she thinks her actions will change his feelings toward her is ridiculous especially because he already had her as a mistress so she has served her purpose. Demetrius made it clear he wants nothing to do with her because he says “I charge thee hence, do not haunt me thus” (864). I wonder how much humiliation she was willing to receive. I felt like she kept putting herself down as she questioned Hermia about how she attracted Demetrius. Then again, could she have been mocking Hermia? Maybe she was being sarcastic when she states in 1.1.88-89, “My ear should catch your voice, my eye your eye,/My tongue should catch you tongue's sweet melody” (853). It seems as though Helena wants to be like Hermia in hopes of getting Demetrius' attention. Perhaps if she backed off and showed disinterest as Hermia does he would want her more.

Marriage as Economics and Safety

Our attitudes towards marriage and romantic love are byproducts of social and economic changes in the past couple of centuries. We are prone to believe that marriage for love is greater/superior than marriage for money or power, that these are different things, and that personal choice in marriage partners outweighs family input. That is why when I first read over Act 1 Scene 1 I felt for Hermia in her wanting to marry Lysander against her father's wishes.  Egeus was obviously being unfair in his discrimination against Lysander even though he (according to himself) is "as well derived as he [Demetrius], as well possessed," with "fortunes every way as fairly ranked if not with vantage." (1.1.99-102) By 21st century standards Egeus was being downright evil, even going so far as threatening to have his daughter killed if she will not comply with his wishes. My ill feelings toward Egeus and Demetri were made worse when Lysander states and no one disputes that Demetrius had previously been engaged to Hermia's friend Helena who was and is still madly in love with him. 

After reading "Marriage and Money" and then rereading the first couple pages of Act 1 I realized I might have judged Egeus too harshly. In the sixteenth century when A Midsummer Night's Dream is set marriage was a way of ensuring inheritances and the safety and well being of offspring so it was a family decision. Marriage was an economic move and a social one, marrying into a certain family might raise your social class or your children's social class. Families marrying off daughters needed to provide dowries so the couple could be comfortable. There were even dowers, the husband's inheritance from his father when he died,  that the wife would inherit if the husband died before her ("Marriage and Money, 266). Egeus was just trying to marry off Hermia to someone he thought would be able to take care of her. The fact that Demetrius had already been engaged just proved that he was good enough to be married to. Because Egeus had spent time with Demetrius and not Lysander even if their qualifications were identical Demetrius would earn Hermia's hand in her father's eyes. He is trusting his daughter's safety and his grandchildren's safety to a man he is positive can keep them well.

Hermia's ultimately childish decision to not even consider her father's feelings or reasoning and running away instead of doing what is best for her family was what completely changed my mind about her character.  Also Lysander is going to try to convince his rich childless Aunt to give him all her money which is just as despicable. I'm rooting for Hermia and Lysander to get away together because they really deserve each other.

What's in a name?

After responding to question 6 for acts I and II of A Midsummer Night's Dream, I was inspired to delve deeper into the names Shakespeare assigned his characters and why he would do so. With help from Behindthename.com I was able to find etymology for most of the characters we've been introduced to so far.

Unsurprisingly, Shakespeare's A Midsummer Night's Dream uses many ancient Greek names for prominent characters. I'm sure when Shakespeare's plays were first hitting the stage in England most viewers were familiar with the stories and characters from ancient Greek myths. Unlike myself, much of his audience probably understood the intention behind names like king Theseus (which could possibly be derived from the Greek tithemi, meaning to set) who braved the legendary Greek labyrinth Crete. Theseus' namesake is woven straight into his character in A Midsummer Night's Dream (explained by how he won over the heart of Hippolyta in act I), but through my quick research I found that this was not the case with most other characters. In fact, I discovered that Shakespeare himself had not only popularized but invented Latinized versions of many Greek names for use in his plays.

Hippolyta's name is an example of Shakespeare creating a Latin version of the original Greek name Hippolyte (which was the feminized version of Hippolytos who, in Greek legend was the son of Theseus and the love-object of his step-mother Phaedra). It wasn't until my interest in etymology lead me to these sources that I uncovered the layers behind character names. 

I bet that Shakespeare anticipated an underlying knowledge of Greek and even roman mythology amongst his intended audience, hence why he used and altered names of kings, gods and popular mythological characters. The intertwined relationships between the origins of the names themselves (like Hippolyta and Theseus) work well to compliment the relationships between the characters. While I may not be well-versed in Shakespeare, I do know that a lot of his plays unfold messy (and at times, disturbing) relationships for the pleasure of his audience. I wonder if the etymology and mythology behind the names Theseus and Hippolyta foreshadow an unsuccessful or perhaps insestuous marriage! 

And as far as foreshadowing goes, Hermia's name (another Shakespeare original) was probably taken from the Greek god Hermes who is associated with speed and good luck; will Hermia encounter a stroke of speedy good-luck despite the effects of the love-potion given to Lysander in act II, or is Shakespeare potentially going for an ironic association? Irony is certainly a likely contender considering the etymology of Demetrius, which is a Latinized form of the goddess Demeter (it is revealed by Helen in act II that she feels she has taken on a male-role in the pursuit of Demetrius; could his femininely inspired name be a play on the stance of his character?)

We will just have to stay tuned to A Midsummer Night's Dream to find out just how much Shakespeare considered etymology and Greek mythology in the naming of his characters!

Meta-Blogging!

In my last three posts on “New Paltz Shakespeare” I have looked at; “A Midsummer Night’s Dream”, “Twelfth Night” and “Othello”.
In my first post about “A Midsummer Night’s Dream” I examined the text to stage aspect of the play, looking at performance through the lens of the NYC ballet, considering how the original text can be communicated in so many ways (ie through dance and without words). My second post “Everybody Plays the Fool” was a bit spacey; it attempted to focus on Feste and the true fools of the play. Shakespeare may name characters like Feste and other more bumbling men (like the Rude Mechanicals in Midsummer and the police in “Much Ado about Nothing”) as fools, but each set of characters seems to open a new commentary on people and their actions. Finally last week’s post was about tragedy in Othello and the pieces of the play that can classify it as so. I also focused on the opposing dimensions of the relationships before and after the classic happy ending.
Although each post seems quite different from one another I think they have a central focus on the duality that Shakespeare creates in his works. The collision of different characters and seamless questions the text presents keep me working to try and decode the plays even more. I am also working to understand Shakespeare’s works though the idea of opposites and parallel situations. How can his writings be presented without words? Who are the true fools in the plays? Why do the comedies have many aspects of tragedy? The opposing situations and different tasks certainly are very interesting to me!
I would like to revisit the idea of the happy endings and majority of unrealistic relationships in the comedies and the darker but sometimes more true character bonds in the tragedies, through the context of marriage and love.
I am enjoying this alternative/additional classroom space, the blog is a nice format to further explore our ideas and see what our classmates are thinking. It’s fun to write blog posts as opposed to mini essays or in class reflections because we can put in video clips, have as much space and time as needed to get into an idea and we can comment on one another’s work. I enjoy the more freestyle guidelines as it allows me to think about the ideas more thoroughly. It’s also a great exercise at writing for others and presenting my ideas in a clear and approachable way.

How Did Shakespeare Sound When he Spoke?

This is a question pursued by scholars with surprising degree of success, as you'll see in this article and video.


It's interesting to remember that Shakespeare's spoken English was roughly the same as the first settlers in America. I like the point that in studying the pronunciation of his language, we are looking at the origins of American speech, as well.

Much Angst About a Misapprehension!

Dogberry & Verges

A connection was made in class between "Much Ado About Nothing"'s Dogberry and Verges and "A Midsummer Night Dream"'s rude mechanicals. Shakespeare is drawing comic relief from the lower middle class once more, this time also at their expense. The humor of these characters of "The Watch" is derived from their ignorant misuse of words and unwitting puns while Dogberry and Verges are speaking of their policing role that they take very seriously.

It was unclear in "A Midsummer Night's Dream" whether the audience is meant to pity or take humor in the mechanical's play they flub hopelessly and I felt the same conflict for the Watch as Act IV unfolded. Dogberry and Verges say absolutely ridiculous things, which was pure fun to read in Act III when they were on the beat, but when it came to discovering Don John's scheme and warning Leonato before the wedding, their verbal stumbling was cringe-worthy. Although they were the most enlightened two characters of the play at that moment, the two of them came off just as silly as always in the instance Dogberry "defends" Verges: "...an old man, sir, and his wits are not so blunt as God help, I would desire they were." (3.5, Lines 9-11) I myself would lose patience trying to sort through this type of backwards conversation, so I don't place blame on Leonato for brushing them off and continuing to his daughter's wedding. This was just such a terrifically ironic scene, placing the crux particulars of the play in the hands that don't know what to do with it.

My Contention With Claudio

The end of Act III and wedding-alter scene that followed left me feeling very malcontent with Claudio's conduct.

After falling for Don John's ruse, Claudio did not just decline marrying Hero quietly the next day, but went as far as to publicly insult her and deliver scathing remarks such as the following, "You seem to me as Dian in her orb...But you are more intemperate in your blood/Than Venus or those pampered animals/That rage in savage sensuality." (4.1, 55-59) The blistering insults and name-calling seemed very over-the-top and uncalled for, as I read it. Hero's response did not carry as much assertive objection as I would have liked or might have expected from a character like Beatrice if she were in Hero's place. Hero seemed demure and crumbling against Claudio's outrageous accusations. Of course, Claudio gave her a snowball's chance of defending herself by referring to her flush of shock as further proof to her guilt, "By these exterior shows? But she is none. She knows the heat of a luxurious bed. Her blush is guiltiness, not modesty." (4.1, 38-40) Claudio's behavior is exceedingly cruel and is the crown to a series of bizarre actions he has taken with Hero.

Claudio's first stint of weirdness can be traced to trying to woo Hero through the gestures of a friend. At first read, I chalked this up to severe bashfulness on Claudio's part, but in hindsight taking this disaster wedding into account, it was a sign of Claudio's distance and lack of intimacy for Hero. Claudio gave a lot of talk about love to his soldier bros, but there are scarce examples of Claudio being affectionate towards Hero. His snap-judgement of Hero's "sensuality" without attempt to question her or hear her side of the matter has made up my mind that Claudio may not have been Hero's match after all.

Noticing Systems of Class in Act V of A Midsummer Night's Dream

In Act V of A Midsummer Night's Dream, I thought that the details having to do with class structure seemed interesting. When the artisans put on their performance for the upper class, it seemed like the upper class took pity on them in a belittling fashion. The upper class didn't expect the lower class to be anything more than what they were. They saw them almost like children who were not capable of achieving certain things. Hippolyta even says, “Indeed, he hath played on this prologue like a child on a recorder...” in lines 122-123. The artisans are neither insulting due to their terrible performance, nor are they thought of as people who might benefit from an education in order to give a better performance in the future. Instead, they are laughed at or thought of as cute because they might now know any better. Everyone seems to be strictly bound to one level of the class structure with barely any room to change one's rank in society. The upper class maintains a certain amount of distance between themselves and the lower class, as well as a level of control by being more educated. In a similar way, the fairies maintain a certain amount of distance from the humans and a certain amount of control over their lives by having a distinct knowledge of love potions and magical powers that they feel completely fine about using on the humans without their knowledge.

I thought it was comical and interesting that in the Epilogue, Puck casually glosses over all of the ways in which the fairies may have truly interrupted and abused the lives of the humans by expressing a kind/politically correct apology, in a very professional or cocksure fashion, to anyone who may have been offended by the play. This just seems so hilarious! While I absolutely loved the fairies, it's interesting to see how issues of class were used for comedic purposes and what the characters got away with!

Should Act V Have Gone The Route of "Die, die die, die, die"?

Should Act V Have Gone The Route of "Die, die die, die, die"?

Blog Post #1 By Morgan Smith

A question some Shakespeare scholars pose in response to A Midsummer Night's Dream Act V is, "Was that really necessary?". When we last left our couples and characters in Act IV, most of the problems that initiated this whimsical play were resolved; the youths were paired off with their rightful mates, Oberon and Titania's feud produced Oberon victor, Bottom restored, and Theseus and Hippolyta's wedding is underway.

Don't roll down the curtains just yet- there are a number of subtle and significant themes continued in Act V that are worth your observation.

Echoing the title, dreams play an importance throughout the play and Act V served as a cincher to this motif. Puck wrapped up the theme of dreams by heralding Hippolyta and Theseus' later conversation of the lovers' "dreams" with this Epilogue, 'If we shadows have offended,/Think but this, and all is mended;That you have but slumbered here." (895, Lines 1-4) At this point, many of the characters presume that the proceedings of the night before were merely reverie and Puck's address to the audience fashions the play into a whimsical dream the crowd has enjoyed.

But besides repeating pre-existing themes, Act V gave a unique and silent version of AMND's leading ladies, Hermia and Helena. For the first time, these otherwise opinionated women have nothing to say in Act V. The previously unstoppable Helena and outspoken Hermia who defied "the ancient privilege of Athens" (850) seem to have nothing to say now that they have acquired the objects of their affection. This change in character insinuates marriage as the ultimate social achievement for women in this society, while the males can expect to go on to other things (and provide commentary to crude plays).

Act V served as a vehicle to tie the loose ends of themes, such as gender. Hippolyta, the symbolically conquered Amazon queen, is finally married to Theseus in this Act preceded by the play the "rude mechanicals" so laboriously put together. Compared to where we saw them last stating their wishes to rise up from their blue-collar post, their production of 'Pyramus and Thisbe' does not live up to their expectations and they unknowingly suffer harsh critique from their audience, "Hard-handed men that work Athens here, Which never laboured in their minds till now", is what Egeus refers to the players as. They bumble through the tragic love story- which eerily echoed the plot of Romeo and Juliet, though I've heard forbidden romances that end with everyone dying is a classic story arc (Tristan and Isolde, anyone?).

At first I thought such a play was an odd choice to entertain wedding guests with, but the theme of hardships and love seemed to shadow the trials faced by everyone in the woods prior. This reflection in 'Pyramus and Thisbe' to me added to the dreamlike mystique of the Acts that took place in the forest.

Overall, I do not feel AMND would be the same without Act V to really nail all those motifs on the head once and for all.

I would also like to add the pleasure I took in Theseus' reaction to Bottom offering an epilogue or rustic bergamask dance at the conclusion of the play, "No epilogue, I pray you; for your play needs no excuse...Marry, if he that writ it had played Pyramus and hanged himself in Thisbe's garter it would have been a fine tragedy...But come, your bergamask. Let the epilogue alone." (893)

It made me laugh. That is the best and most disparaging rejection to a shabby play!

Although A Midsummer Night's Dream is recognized as a comedy, one of the major themes within this play is love. Does love intertwine with comedy or is it more associated with tragedy? As human beings, do we dream the impossible dream? I think everyone does in some way and we see this in the play as well. Although the women get what they want in the end, is it really what they wanted? Their rights are taken away and they have become silent. Bottom, Snug, Snout, Quince and Flute all decide to put on a play, and are all comedic characters. These are actors who rarely have used knowledge, but at the same time are hard working individuals. One major reason they put on the play is because they think they will get paid for it. They didn’t agree to be in the play because they want to make a career out of it. They feel that this will enable them to move up in society and become a higher class.

A moral within this play is if you dare to dream your dream, it MIGHT come true; and if it doesn't then hopefully it will still be fun and entertaining. Dreams are something we always wish to be true but they might be hard to fulfill. The course of true love is not an easy thing and in the play Lysander assures Hermia of this. No matter what there will always be difficulties and obstacles that people must face. Hermia does everything she can to remain positive and thinks that after overcoming and facing the difficulties of love that it will all soon come together. This is the price that lovers must pay. The exploration of love is at the heart of the play, although it is recognized to be a comedy. In this play we see that it is a male dominated society. Gender is one of the big issues, does it ever really get resolved? As far as gender roles go, Hippolyta is the most traditional feminine woman because the other female characters don’t listen to the men. This may show us that they are strong willed and will fight for what they want despite what others say.