midterm blog

Out of the three blog posts I have done so far this semester, my focus generally ends up being on the main characters, more specifically the main ruling characters within the plays. Looking back on my first post, “Women Rule,” I really like how I was able to present my idea and support it and even though it was the first one, I still think it was one of my best. Even the title shows my focus being on the power of women at the time and goes on to discuss the power Portia has over the play both as a woman and disguised as a man. My second blog post titled, “Audience’s Reaction,” began to take me away from the more structured, essay like post found in the previous one and more toward a conversational, questioning one. Here, I started by discussing where each play took place and Shakespeare’s hand in editing the actual events. At first he played it safe by keeping the plays off of the country of England, but then all his history plays, many of them controversial, became centered on England, and their royalty. Lately, I’ve been finding that I am very curious as to how the audience would have reacted, or the current royalty would have reacted to the portrayal of one of Shakespeare’s plays. Unfortunately, that is something we can never really know, but to have that insight and other people’s opinions of what happened is also interesting to me. Hence, the reason why in this post I noticed myself beginning to ask more questions hoping to spark a discussion with other people in the class. My last blog, “Prince Harry,” was even less formal than before, and I’m not sure how I feel about that. In that one I kind of feel like I was jabbering on, blurting out ideas just hoping they fit together. At the time, I didn’t know if Harry would become Henry V, a man I had always thought to be this great guy, but even at the start of reading Henry V, I am still waiting to see it happen. Although, I have to say he is really good at covering his back such as in the case of issuing those death warrants. He still has time to redeem himself in my eyes…

Many times, especially in the more recent two blog posts, I asked questions a lot trying to see what others would respond to and what their thoughts were. Unfortunately, that doesn’t always work. I know Professor Mulready responded to two of them, but only one student responded to one other of my posts. Maybe I need to work on my approach, maybe they aren’t interested in what I’m saying, or maybe I just get lost in the quay, it’s not a big deal, just a note to consider.

As Therese mentioned in her blog, I also believe the blogs to be a great way to discuss topics and ideas that we did not get a chance to discuss in class. Sometimes ideas are sparked in class or there is something that either interests or bothers us and by writing informally about it we begin to see where our thoughts are going or gain insight from other classmates. It also gives those who are quieter in class a chance to show off what they know and think. It gives our thoughts some place to go instead of staying dormant in our minds.

Blogging

What I like most about the blogging assignments is that they create a space in which we get to express ideas that we aren’t always able to get to in our class discussions. It’s a valuable tool: I kind of use it as a way to gradually tease out ideas that aren’t fully formulated, but that keep popping up in my head as I read each play. What I like most about it, however, is that I get to read about what other people think of the plays. From others’ posts I’ve come across questions that I would never have thought of asking and arguments that supplement my understanding of our readings.
In my blogs I mostly focus on Shakespeare’s depiction of women, how he creates his characters’ identities, and how he represents power relations. When writing the posts I don’t remember feeling that they were particularly political, but reading them all in succession makes me realize that my writing comes from a particular standpoint: it’s mostly influenced by a feminist focus on women, but it is also concerned with the character’s positions within the societies they inhabit. This is a little surprising to me because I usually focus on more methodological aspects of writing and not so much on broader themes; it also makes me realize how much my education has influenced my stance on a variety of subjects. I don’t think 3 blogs is enough for me to recognize a change in my writing, though. Perhaps by the end of the semester I’ll focus more on other aspects of Shakespeare’s writing.
There are two things I think are worth revisiting: the first is the examination of cycles and progress in the second tetralogy. By the end of Henry IV I began to see a recurrence of a central powerful character being surrounded by a group of people who try to influence his actions. In Richard II the king was surrounded by older advisors who didn’t really want to give up the power they had accumulated while Richard had been young; In Henry IV Hal surrounds himself with thieves and liars and members of the lower classes; in Henry V we find that Hal now surrounds himself with religious men. In each case the group determines the identity of the individual: when Hal surrounded himself with rogues, he was seen as a rogue. When he surrounds himself with gentlemen and seeks counsel from an archbishop, he’s a great religious leader. A contrasting example of progress would be how Hal casts Falstaff out in order to assume his role as a serious King. I also notice that each instance of progress is actually an act of manipulation and violence, which makes me question whether the “progress” is really worth it. The second is that I see a parallel between themes in Shakespeare’s comedies and these history plays. In both the characters in power try to make it seem as if they don’t have as much power as they actually do by siphoning responsibilities off to others: the Duke makes Isabella decide not to kill Angelo, and Henry V makes the Archbishop decide to go to war. Also, both Measure for Measure and Richard II illustrate a historical shift in methods of social control: both plays move from punishing through spectacle (Angelo wanting to execute Isabella’s brother; Bolingbroke killing Richard’s associates) to disciplining through surveillance (the Duke disguising himself as a friar in order to effectively manipulate and “direct” Angelo & maybe even his marriage proposal; York insisting on telling the technically illegitimate king that his son is a traitor, which is a kind of internalization of the surveillance.) Hal exemplifies this idea: he goes from using spectacle to legitimate his king-ness (killing Hotspur) to using surveillance (making sure people know that he’s cut himself off from Falstaff.) … Random, but I think I may like the comedies more than the histories.

Reflections on Blogging Throughout the Semester

In my earlier posts, it seems as though I was only focusing on events that were happening in relation to the plot. As the semester went on though, I feel like my posts have begun to get a clearer focus and are more specific to a certain few ideas. Maybe I just needed to get the hang of blogging, or maybe I’ve just gotten used to doing it, but it seems as though I’ve been able to find something from the text more specific to think about while reading and in class than I had been previously in the semester.

I think by focusing on the bigger ideas or issues in the play rather then just the events of the plot in my blogging has helped me to better gain a knowledge about the plays as a whole and the themes they encompass, rather than just getting a simple understanding that plot and interactions between characters.

Something I think might be worth revisiting in my post would be the idea of divine right, as well as how kings shape their identity. In a post about Richard II, I wrote “Bolingbroke talks about his banishment in Act 3.1, and says ‘From my own windows torn my household coat,/ Razed out my imprese, leaving me no sign,/ Save men's opinions and my living blood,/ To show the world I am a gentlemen’ (3.1.24-27). These lines show us just how important Bolingbroke's lineage is to him, as well as his honor. This also reveals how these things contribute hugely to constructing his identity” I think that this could be worth revisiting because monarchs and the idea of divine right was an incredibly significant part of life for everyone.