Does Shakespeare want to change the status quo

       This was not one of my favorite Shakespeare plays. I've tried to like it. Really, I did. But I just can't. It all seems so familiar. We have a gaggle of confused lovers, rumors, mis-identification and the threat of actual violence. This play is perhaps the easiest to update for the twenty first century, and wouldn't look out of place on any television network, at any hour of the day. Perhaps that universality is what makes the work so timeless. Once again, Shakespeare uses the cloak of comedy to address social issues and questions to be grappled with at the time. After having read a few plays, it's interesting to draw parallels between the works.
       Like the other works we've read thus far this semester, marriage plays a huge roll in "Much Ado". Once again, we are presented with a pair of lovers who've yet to cement they're feelings with marriage (Claudio and Hero). Pretty standard. We're presented with two lovers who don't quite know they're lovers yet, indeed who seem like adversaries (Benedick and Beatrice). This is reminiscent of the start of "A Midsummer Night's Dream", with two pairings who we assume will wind up together in the end (being a comedy, we can assume this happy outcome).
       Once again, the plot is influenced by the power of the state over the individual, as embodied by our villain, Don Jon. This has been a running theme through out the plays we've read thus far, but  The "Bedford Companion" reading about property, marriage and children opened up a world of new idea's that I had not considered before, including why so many of Shakespeare's plays thus far revolve around marriages and the trouble arranging them can raise. The idea of protecting a piece of property by designating heirs for the good of the house is an interesting one, even though it is fraught with dangers to the family as a social body. Don Jon becomes a tragic example of how such a system can affect an individual.
      While not a direct parallel, this issue of property and succession is a theme that runs through all that we've read thus far. Viola wouldn't have had a problem in "Twelfth Night" without such a system. The need to flee out of the city is removed for Lysander and Hermia without the system in place. But is Shakespeare commenting on any unfairness of the situation, or merely using it because it is the policy of the times and he can build a story around it? In this interest the plot resolution results in the embodiment of the unfairness of policy fleeing the city, removing himself from the society. The couples are joined, and the status quo is upheld. While he does address interesting concepts regarding females and their roles in society, thus far it seems Shakespeare favors the status quo. Only more readings will tell.

When it comes to Shakespeare, nothing is unworthy of noting.

Without a doubt, many readers of Much Ado About Nothing’s Act IV, scene i would “note” that it contains far more tragic elements than what would be expected from a comedic play. Indeed, the scene featuring Claudio’s public rejection of Hero at the altar is quite a shocking moment in the production, however essential it is to the plot’s development. Despite its negative tone, however, this scene brings forth a passage containing some of Shakespeare’s most brilliant wordplay. Shakespeare uses the irony of Hero’s name as the basis of several clever insults, all playing on the definition of “hero” and the common conceptions of the word. I’d like to examine this short passage to highlight the fact that, even within only twenty-five lines, Shakespeare is able to intersperse many nuance details in his writing.

The witty play on words begins in line 76:

Hero: O God defend me, how am I beset!

What kind of catechizing call you this?

Claudio: To make you answer truly to your name.

Here, Claudio is demanding that Hero answer to him who she really is. At first take, the line seems merely a rhetorical question for dramatic emphasis, but when taken figuratively, Claudio really wants Hero to answer true to heroic virtues. He implies that if Hero is her name, then a “hero” should answer him, that is, one who possesses the attributes of nobleness and honesty.

Hero, the character, then replies, “Is it not Hero? Who can blot that name / With any just reproach?” In other words, who can tarnish the reputation of a hero with such an accusation? Claudio is quick to reply, “Marry, that can Hero. / Hero itself can blot out Hero’s virtue,” another play on the name (IV.i.80–81). Claudio asserts that Hero “blotted” out the virtue of a true hero by committing her alleged misdeed. A little later, in lines 98–100, Claudio exclaims, “O Hero! What a Hero hadst thou been / If half thy outward graces had been placed / About thy thoughts and counsels of thy heart!” Here is an obvious play on “hero,” for Claudio is explaining that, if Hero was as pure and beautiful inside as she was outwardly, she would fulfill the definition of a true hero’s qualities.

            I found examining this scene important, for it is a prime example of the beauty of Shakespeare’s writing, and it also highlights the necessity to pay close attention to every little nuance of his writing. Prior to taking this class with Dr. Mulready, I never knew this particular play’s title to have anything to do with “noting”; now, I understand the importance of appreciating minute details even more than ever, in this one and all of Shakespeare's plays.

When it comes to Shakespeare, nothing is unworthy of noting.

Iago's Motivation

The first thing that struck me when I started reading Othello, was that it seemed worlds away from the largely comic Much Ado About Nothing.  But as I continued to read the first act, I did note that just as in Much Ado About Nothing, many of the characters in Othello are deceiving the others; the principle deceiver being Iago.  Unlike in Much Ado where Don John's deceptions are figured out and righted, Iago's ability to deceive downright everyone thus far has me convinced that this might be the kind of play where the villain triumphs.

The source of Iago's hate for his master, Othello, is apparently all due to his feeling slighted at being overlooked for the position of lieutenant.  This propels Iago to seek revenge on not only Cassio and Othello, but apparently everyone they associate with.  I wonder though if Iago has any other motivation for such serious general malicious intent.  At first I thought that Iago's disdain for Othello particularly might be based in somehow in racism, as everyone seems to make note of Othello's skin color- but I think this wouldn't really account for Iago's hatred for everyone else as well. I think that maybe the only explanation is in Act I scene I,  where Iago says of his loyalty to Othello:

 In following him, I follow but myself;
Heaven is my judge, not I for love and duty,
But seeming so, for my peculiar end. (I.i.58-60)

Iago has no true loyalty to anyone but himself, but he also says that "heaven is [his] judge" which to me means that Iago is saying that he has no reverence for God or Heaven, because he still intends to act in whatever way pleases him.  Iago makes himself more enigmatic as he goes on, saying that the day that he shows his true nature is the day that he lets crows peck out his heart (I.i.61-64). As Iago concludes his passage with "I am not what I am", I'm left wondering how Iago sees himself and how we are meant to see him.  If Iago tells us that he is a villain, but then says that his identity is unstable, then I'm curious to see if he will purely be a villain over the course of the play or if at some point he'll express some sort of pathos.

Beatrice and Benedick

So here we are with Much Ado About Nothing. In the very first scene of the play we are introduced to some very interesting characters, but the character that is of the most interest to me is Beatrice. We learn that she is the niece of Leonato, the governor of Messina.

It is true that she is good-hearted and generous, but there is a side of her that I can’t help but compare to Benedick. These two characters appear at the beginning of the play, mainly in Act one, to be complete opposites, but in fact I see many things between them that are true similarities.

These similarities make me think that perhaps the idea of Don Pedro and Leonato is right on point. “She were an excellent wife for Benedick” (2.1.294). 

To start, the two are very good with words, quick-witted, and get kicks out of mocking others, even their own friends. Beatrice says, “…he is the Prince’s jester, and a very dull fool…” (2.1.113). She goes on to say that his only talent is to come up with “impossible slanders” (2.1.114). Ironically, she too has many of the same characteristics that she says makes Benedick a fool.

Being that the women in the previous plays do not act and speak the way that Beatrice does, I can only assume that it is not typical behavior for the time. Beatrice’s constant pestering of Benedick is a quality that makes her a very unique character of this play. Perhaps, her speaking out of line is the major quality that makes her the fool of the play.

I think that it appears most that Benedick is a fool, when he is giving different meanings to what Beatrice has said to him about dinner (2.3.226-231). This scene most directly reminds me of the scene in Twelfth Night where Feste and Viola are mixing and playing with words.  

                                “No, sir, I live by the church.”

                                “Art thou a clergyman?”

                                “No such matter, sir. I do live by the church; for I do live at my house, and my house doth stand by the church.” (3.1.3-6).

I will personally be paying close attention to this technique and see if Shakespeare continues to use. I am also very interested to learn if there is something underlying in this concept in terms of this play as well as others.

We looked last week at the fool in Twelfth Night, Feste, and the role that he has on the story. Although I am not yet sure how this play is going to end, I do know that in each of the plays we have read thus far, fools do play an important role. My thoughts are that this play is going to be based a great deal on the fools of the story. I find it interesting that these three plays have so many similarities. Let’s hear it for the fools of the play thus far!

The Spirit of Feste in Much Ado

    As a kind of bridge in my consideration of the two Comedies (since Twelfth Night is still on my mind) I’d like to kick this off with a look at Feste’s themes and try to show how they play out in the first two acts of Much Ado. In the guise of one Sir Tobas, Feste says, “That that is is” (4.2 13). But hadn’t he just said in the previous scene “nothing that is so is so” (4.1 7)? So which is it? That that is is or nothing that is so is so? On deeper reflection, perhaps those “so”’s are the vessels of meaning in that sentence that hint at a fundamental difference in the ontology of the two phrases. We might elaborate on the two sentences to discover their underlying harmony: That that is is, might mean to say that THAT--the essential nature of a thing, its core and creative source--is the only thing that can be said to truly Be, while “that” that is merely “so” is not actually, originally so--or rather the “so” part of “that” is a mask of the true being of THAT--which is by its nature unavailable for rendering in language, in words, unless that language is understood merely to point to its essential nature, like the road sign that leads the way to a vast metropolis. So that nothing that is “so” is in fact “so” because the state of being “so” is itself malleable, no more than a facade that morphs in and out of life in an ever changing process of becoming (the river of Hericlitus, into which we cannot step twice). On the other hand, THAT that IS, abides in an eternal state of Being; it is not subject to becoming like the (no)things that are merely “so.” And so the almost immediate transformation of identity in the masquerading outset of Much Ado, brings into question the same thematic concerns--perhaps ontological concerns--that Feste raises in his merry wordplay in Twelfth Night. 
 
     Don Pedro’s “remedy” for Claudio in 1.1 is to assume his part in some disguise “and tell fair Hero I am Claudio” (1.1 268). And so when Antonio delivers the strange news to Leonato in the following scene, he equates the overheard news to a book that has “a good cover” (1.2 6-7). But they will “hold it as a dream till it appear itself." The news appears at first to be good; but we later find out that the news that Antonio brings is not in fact the news that is; the cover is grown as false as melancholic Don John who pleads to his servant Conrad, “let me be that I am, and seek not to alter me” (1.3 29). The irony is that Don John’s cover quite plainly reveals the nature of the words in his book of being, and yet as we see later in the play he is grievously misread. It seems we encounter the same problems of reading identity in this play as we did in Twelfth Night.

Who's in Love with Who?

 Shakespeare’s Much Ado About Nothing is already, a very interesting play. The first thing that grabbed my attention was the title. It seems here that Shakespeare is blatantly telling his audience that the conflict that occurs in this play is unnecessary. This informed the rest of my reading of the first two acts very much, and helped me formulate the two questions I will attempt to answer here.

In the play, Beatrice and Benedick seem to at first despise each other, but with small clues like Leonato explaining that theirs is a “merry war” (1.1, 50) and eventually telling Claudio that Beatrice is secretly in love with Benedick the reader may think otherwise. My first question is centered on this belief. In act II, scene 1 Don Pedro, the prince, decides that he will take it upon himself to make Beatrice and Benedick fall in love because he believes they will be good for each other. At first Leonato doesn’t seem sold on the idea. He states that “if they were but a week married they would talk themselves mad” (2.1, 307-308). It is only after Don Pedro puts pressure on the group to follow him on this venture that Leonato tells Claudio of Beatrice’s secret love, while Benedick is in ear shot. I wonder, is he only making this up to please the prince and trick Benedick into thinking that Beatrice is in love with him? The tile of the play would seem to suggest so, and Spark Notes states that “Beatrice mocks him again before departing, but the infatuated Benedick interprets her words as containing hidden messages of love” (Summary and Analysis of Act II, scenes i-iii) which also suggests deception on Leonato’s part. Based on this evidence I would assume that Beatrice is not really in love with Benedick.

The other question that I have is about the love triangle that is going on in the play with Claudio, Don Pedro, and Hero. In the play Claudio reveals to Benedick that he is in love with Hero. In turn, Benedick tells Don Pedro this news who he decides to win Hero for Claudio by pretending to be him at the masquerade. During the masquerade Claudio over hears that Don Pedro is wooing Hero and becomes very upset because he does not know that Don Pedro is doing it for him. This is my question: Is Don Pedro really doing this for Claudio or is he wooing Hero for himself? First of all, it is strange that Don Pedro doesn’t tell Claudio this plan and get his blessing beforehand. In addition, I’m surprised he would even want to do this in the first place because if it works and Hero finds out that her wooer is really Don Pedro then she might want him instead of Claudio. On the other hand, Don Pedro is the prince so he probably feels that there is no need to tell Claudio because he should be happy the prince is doing anything for him. Furthermore, it seems like it is in his nature to play match maker, since we see this with Benedick and Beatrice as well. Therefore, in this case I would say that he is not trying to woo Hero for himself, but that he is genuinely trying to help Claudio.

Either way, it seems to me that Don Pedro is at the center of the drama in this play and that miscommunication and perception are the themes that will drive the plot, as the title Much Ado About Nothing  seems to suggest. I guess I’ll just have to wait and see if my specific questions are answered and if my predictions are correct!

The Hatred of Two Brothers

In Much Ado About Nothing, Don Pedro and Don John represents the classic tale of sibling rivalry that has stretches all the way back since Cain and Abel in the Bible.  But, unlike Cain and Abel’s rivalry of presenting the better sacrifices, Don Pedro and Don John’s rivalry is one caused by the sins of their father. In fact the rivalry presented within Don Pedro and Don John is one based on the social concept of status and not actual hate towards his brother.

                Don Pedro, unlike Don John, is the legitimate heir to his father’s fortunes. During the Renaissance era, (as stated in The Bedford Companion to Shakespeare), illegitimate children could not inherit anything from their fathers. (McDonald 263) Although, illegitimate children could not and do not inherit their father’s fortunes, they are still taken care of and given money for their education, but they are still frowned upon in society and it is hard for them to advance further in status because of the circumstances of their birth. They are often excluded and shunned from, “polite society” because they are bastards and Don John is no exception to this rule.

                Don John’s jealousy is not the classic, “I am jealous of my brother, because he is favored” but exhibits the other classic, yet complex jealousy issue of, “I cannot advance any further and is shunned by the rest of the world, because I am a bastard; Unlike my brother who gets to have everything I want, and therefore I must hate him” issue. The quote,

“I am trusted with a muzzle and enfranchised with a clog;

 therefore I have decreed not to sing in my cage.

If I had my mouth, I would bite;

if I had my liberty, I would do my liking:

in the meantime let me be that I am and seek not to alter me.”

                                                                                (Shakespeare p. 1423)

exemplifies the hardships that Don John goes through as his status of being a bastard child. He, unlike Don Pedro, is restricted. Don John cannot speak freely because if he did, he would lose the favor of the courts and the favor of his brother, who has more power and authority over him. The extent of Don John’s restrictions on what he can and cannot do is personified through the use of the cage imagery of him not being able to “sing” in his cage. This demonstrates a physical aspect of restriction and in this case it is the inability of mobility in status. Furthermore the beginning of the quote which shows that he is being muzzled represents the image of not being able to speak because it is covering his mouth. We further see this hate for his brother, because of status, in the quote,

                “Come, come, let us thither: this may prove food to

my displeasure. That young start-up hath all the

glory of my overthrow: if I can cross him any way, I

bless myself every way. You are both sure, and will assist me?”

                                                                (Shakespeare p. 1424)

which presents the image of a king being overthrown (Don Pedro), and a new leader (Don John), one that is not supposed to be on the thrown as the new leader.

                The hatred expressed in Don John towards his own brother is one that is manufactured by society and has turned his heart into stone. If society had been more accepting Don John and Don Pedro could have been more brotherly towards each other. But then again, Don John could try to recreate Cain and Abel, in which only one of them would come out to be Cain, and the other a dead sheep herder. 

Gender Roles and Marriage

In the first two Acts of Much Ado About Nothing we learn that the Prince, Don Pedro, and his military men or knights are coming to visit the home of the governor of Messina, Leonato.  We learn that noble Claudio is Don Pedro’s right hand man accompanies him and Claudio seems to fall in love with Leonato’s daughter, Hero, at first sight and wishes to marry her.  We also learn that Benedick, another lord who has accompanied Don Pedro, disdains marriage as a yoke around the neck of men, and that Beatrice, Leonato’s niece, is a witty woman who disdains marriage as well and they both dislike one another at the beginning. The treatment of gender is well described in these first two Acts and can be best described provocatively through the characters of Beatrice and Benedick and more traditionally through the characters Hero and Claudio.

The primacy of patriarchy in English society is summed up in a Balthasar’s song:

Sigh no more, ladies, sigh no more.

Men were deceivers ever

One foot in sea, and one on shore.

To one thing constant never.

Then sigh not so, but let them go.

And be you blithe and bonny.

Converting all your sounds of woe

Into hey nonny, nonny (2.3.57-63).

This song shows men to be deceitful and women to play their role of being beautiful, not complaining and singing their pain away—in other words, suffer in silence. 

Perhaps it is this acknowledgement at the silence women must bear that convinces Beatrice she will never marry since she has no problem speaking her mind and has apparently had years of verbal sparring with Benedick.  It seems as if they both enjoy their taunts and witticisms although, because of the gender roles they are both meant to play, neither will admit that they are attracted to the other. Although Beatrice is given the role of shrew by speaking her mind such as when she tells Benedick, “I had rather hear my dog bark at a crow than a man swear he loves me,” she admits that she “was born to speak all mirth and no matter” (1.1.106-108, 2.1.288-289). This seems to show that her duality in being witty—good for a man, bad for a woman—and yet always happy—expected of the perfect wife.  Even Benedick admits that despite his constant insistence against marriage, “The world must be peopled” (2.3.213-214).  This is the point.  Although men and women may not like losing their freedom, they have to have children to populate England.

Nevertheless, men also had anxiety about marriage as can be seen when Benedick is challenged about his insistence about always living the life of a bachelor, saying, “But that I will have a recheat winded in my forehead, or hang my bugle in an an invisible baldic, all women shall pardon me” or when Don Pedro says, “In time the savage bull doth bear the yoke” (1.1.196-198, 1.1.213-214).  The word “yoke” is a disparaging one.  According to the Oxford English Dictionary, a “yoke” is “A contrivance, used from ancient times, by which two animals, esp. oxen, are coupled together...” and yet, for an agricultural society, it seems inevitable.

 

Richard III and Other Miscreants

Learning from the form of our recent tragedies completed in class, I can assume that the turns being thrown by Richard III in Act I are very unlikely to right themselves.

After Richard III double crosses his younger brother, Clarence, by telling rumors to lock him in the tower, I couldn't help but recall Iago when Richard III confides in Clarence, "We say the King is wise and virtuous, and his noble Queen well struck in years, fair and not jealous. We say that Shore's wife hath...a bonny eye, a passing pleasing tongue." (1.1, 90-95) What struck a likeness to Iago for me was the way Richard III was maintaining Clarence's confidence in him while suggesting to Clarence that it may have been King Edward, his wife, or perhaps Lady Shore that is responsible for his imprisonment. Richard III is as two-faced and slippery as Iago, projecting the same type of cringe-worthy artifice that runs through many Shakespearean tragedies.

In comparing Richard III to other antagonists, I must draw attention to the obscurity that surrounds the motives of Shakespeare's villains and what causes them to do as they do. Don John, of 'Much Ado About Nothing', for example, went to great lengths to muddle up the established relationship between Claudio and Hero, chalking up his incorrigible behavior to his insignificance and jealousy of being the bastard brother to Don Pedro. Don John's reasoning of familial resentment hardly seemed consistent with the damage it wrought over Hero's sense of self-worth and reputation and 'Twelfth Night's' Iago takes a vow of silence before relieving the audience with the explanation they yearned for.

These villains, among others, were brought to my mind during Richard III's opening speech which already details why he is so rotten, "I that am rudely stamped and want love's majesty...cheated of feature by dissembling nature, deformed, unfinished, sent before my time...And therefore since I cannot prove a lover...I am determined to prove a villain and hate the idle pleasures of these days." (1.1, 16-31) Richard III chiefly cites his physical deformity and inability to woo as the source of his bitterness and evil ways, yet he also notes a different frustration having to do with Edward, "Instead of mounting barbed steeds...he capers nimbly in a lady's chamber." (1.1, 10-12) Richard III resents his brother, King Edward, for his prowess with women and at the same time is frustrated with his ineffectiveness as a ruler. I both intrigued and filled with dread of reading further in this play and discovering what other awful instances Richard III is going to manifest these inhibitions.

Masculinity in Act V of Much Ado About Nothing

In many of Shakespeare's works, performances of masculinity from Elizabethan times are common. Demonstrations of masculinity, similar to those in Shakespeare’s works, have been mocked, to a certain degree, in films such as Monty Python and Robin Hood: Men in Tights. I'm referring to masculinity here as a form of male culture that often permits hierarchical attitudes with the goal of dominance to measure a man's worth. In Much Ado About Nothing, the performance of masculinity is prominently featured in Act V when Claudio is almost forced to dual with both Leonato and Benedick!

Frequently, masculinity is upheld through strength and proper age. This is exemplified when Cluadio slightly mocks Leonato's old age by stating, “Marry, beshrew my hand / If it should give your age such cause of fear” (5.1.55-56). However, Leonato responds by stating that with all of his gray hairs he challenges Leonato to a dual (5.1.65). Leonato also makes a distinction between himself, as a man, and Claudio, as a boy, when he says, “If thou kill’st me, boy, thou shalt kill a man” (5.1.79). Antonio also calls Cluadio a boy when he says “Come, follow me, boy. Come, sir boy, come, follow me. / Sir boy, I’ll whip you from your foining fence” (5.1.83-84). Due to these observations, it seems clear that masculinity was often threatened when a man was called too old or too young, and therefore powerless.

There is also interesting masculine banter present, in Act V of Much Ado About Nothing, when Benedick wants to challenge Claudio to a dual. Cluadio speaks to Benedick with a macho tone when he says “What, courage, man! What though care killed a cat, / thou hast mettle enough in thee to kill care” (5.1.132-133). Another example that could fit under the category of mannish banter is when Benedick is trying to sing and says that even though he can't sing very well, when it comes to loving, he's great (5.2.26).

Masculinity is just one part of what is to be noticed in Much Ado About Nothing. There are certainly interesting issues with the female characters in the play and all of this is a magnified view of certain aspects of gender within the play, without encompassing other details of the gender dynamics. With that being said, it does seem positive that the play ends with Benedick and Beatrice being married and talking in such a carefree, witty, and joyous manner to one another. Beatrice jokingly says things like “I would not deny you, but, by this good day, I yield / upon great persuasion, and partly to save your life, for I was / told you were in a consumption” (5.4.93-95); and Benedick says things like “A miracle! Here’s our own hands against our hearts. / Come, I will have thee, but, by this light, I take thee for pity” (5.4.91-92). With so much blatant masculinity being flaunted throughout the play (remember that most of the men in this play are soldiers!) and the threat that women face of being sent into religious life, just because of a poor reputation (4.1.241), Beatrice and Benedick, when together, seem to interact on a more equal playing field where hyper masculinity is somewat worthless and women are allowed to be sarcastic and witty.

The Idiots Save the Day

Much Ado About Nothing begins as a comedy of errors. Claudio loves Hero but lacks confidence and has someone else woo her for him. Benedick and Beatrice profess to loathe love and marriage but when tricked by family and friends into believing the other’s passion, they find love with each other. Once Claudio has won the love of the fair Hero, Shakespeare’s light-hearted romp turns dark when Don John plots to besmirch the reputation of Hero, destroy Claudio’s love, and shame her father all in an effort to get back at his brother, Don Pedro. What is the audience to believe has happened here, they enter a comedy and leave a tragedy? Shakespeare saves the day by sending in the clowns.

In a play about confusion, the introduction of Dogberry and Verges comforts the audience that they are still on comedic footing. These petty officials are meant to be the signifiers of nothing. As soon as they are introduced in Act III, Scene 3, Dogberry and Verges display their powers as they interview two watchmen. Dogberry asks if they are good men and true and Verges responds, “Yea, or else it were pity but they should suffer salvation, body and soul.”(3.3.1-3). Salvation is the wrong word in the context of this sentence but it is the correct word for their role in the play as they bumble into the plot just after Don John’s scheme.

Dogberry and Verges are guilty of confusing their words, they commission the two watchmen to become the heroes of the play when Dogberry commands, “… you shall comprehend all vagrom men. You are to bid any man stand, in the Prince’s name (3.3.21-23).” This is exactly what the two watchmen do when they come upon Don John’s henchmen, Borachio and Conrad. Instead of apprehending them as Dogberry means by his command, they listen to detailing of the events that have unfolded and understand the implications of Borachio and Conrad’s actions. This act of comprehension will foil Don John’s plan.

Dogberry and Verges report to Leonato after Conrad and Borachio are captured but Leonato is too busy with his daughter’s wedding. Dogberry announces, “Our watch, sir, have indeed comprehended two auspicious persons, and we would have them this morning examined before your worship (4.1.40-42).” The audience is in on the joke, knowing that this nonsense brought before Leonato is the ado he should be focused on.

Unlike the rude mechanicals in Midsummers Night’s Dream, Dogberry and Verges are central to the plot of Much Ado About Nothing. The rude mechanicals hope to win fame and fortune by presenting their play but all they receive from Thesus’s court is derision. Dogberry in Act V Scene 1 is thanked by Leonato for his “care and honest pains (5.1.297).” The bumbling idiots save the day, receive their fair share of laughter accompanied with the respect of Prince of Aragon’s court.

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.

Much Ado about Dancing

In Much Ado about Nothing, Shakespeare uses dance as a way to help describe the relationships in this play. This is a play of action and movement. Don John attempts to fumble the steps of his brothers consorts, Beatrice and Benedick moving against each other, and all other characters attempting to choreograph them into a duet. His words in this play are words of action and movement. Choices in diction reflect this with words like “ flight” ( 1.1.32), “halting” ( 1.1.52), “run” ( 1.1.74) all within the first moments of play.

Verbal jest seem to create a floor pattern worthy of Fred and Ginger. (See Youtube video at the end of blogpost) Shakespeare uses the rhetorical device like anadiplosis, which takes the last word previously said and knits into the beginning of the present line. Making for seamless verbal choreography as seen between Beatrice and Benedick in the following exchange.

“BEATRICE

A dear happiness to women: they would else have

been troubled with a pernicious suitor. I thank God

and my cold blood, I am of your humour for that: I

had rather hear my dog bark at a crow than a man

swear he loves me.

BENEDICK

God keep your ladyship still in that mind! so some

gentleman or other shall 'scape a predestinate

scratched face.

BEATRICE

Scratching could not make it worse, an 'twere such

a face as yours were.

BENEDICK

Well, you are a rare parrot-teacher.

BEATRICE

A bird of my tongue is better than a beast of yours. “

Act 1. Sc.1. lines 105-114

Not, only does the language create a dance like pattern but the literal references to dance and music are numerous within the text. A highlighted example would be Beatrice’s steamy salsa of a speech to her cousin Hero in 2.1

BEATRICE

The fault will be in the music, cousin, if you be

not wooed in good time: if the prince be too

important, tell him there is measure in every thing

and so dance out the answer. For, hear me, Hero:

wooing, wedding, and repenting, is as a Scotch jig,

a measure, and a cinque pace: the first suit is hot

and hasty, like a Scotch jig, and full as

fantastical; the wedding, mannerly-modest, as a

measure, full of state and ancientry; and then comes

repentance and, with his bad legs, falls into the

cinque pace faster and faster, till he sink into his grave.”

Act 2 Sc. 1 lines 57- 66

Here Beatrice takes the metaphor of dance and applies it to the whole scheme of courting, marriage and life is befitting to life in the upper crusts of Elizabethan society. The separate societies of men and women would converge in the dance hall in ways that was atypical from day to day interactions. Beatrice describes the “cinque a pace” which was dance also known as a galliard. And was known to be the favorite of Queen Elizabeth herself. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galliard). Below is a link to an example of a galliard dance.

http://lcweb2.loc.gov/musdivid/029c.mov

Who're the True Servants?

The servants cause the mischief in comedies it seems. Like in Twelfth Night, where Maria thought up a merry plan to cause things to go a little bit crazy, Antonio’s man and Borachio seem to be the catalysts for chaos this time around. The trouble starts with Antonio’s man. He overhears Claudio and the Prince discussing how Claudio has fallen for Hero…and takes it entirely the wrong way. The Prince has decided to approach Hero at the masked ball later on and pretend to be Claudio to hear of her feelings for him…but the servant seems to think it’s the Prince who has a think for Hero! Leonato then says he’ll have Hero have an answer ready for just in case…for the wrong man! It seems all matter of craziness can spring from this, it seems another case of who loves who. It’s another case of clothing making the man, considering the Prince is disguising himself and as we learned from Viola, no good can come of that in Shakespeare’s plays!

Borachio, on the other hand, hears the full story and knows it’s Claudio who likes Hero. He also knows that the Prince will be dressed up like him to get her feelings. He tells this to his lord Don John who, we learn, doesn’t like Claudio. As it turns out, Claudio was the one who kept John from over throwing his brother. “If I can cross him any way I bless myself every way.” He seems to have every intention of causing chaos for poor Claudio. And thus the stage is set for very wacky things happening, as they are wont to do in Shakespeare’s work.

And this is all just in Act one. Shakespeare shows his skill at setting the stage and immediately getting the reader, or the audience seeing as it is a play, sucked right in. This was of course necessary for the time when the people on the floor could be easily bored and walk out, or throw rotten food. It was always best to keep the action moving and keep them entertained, but I digress! The point is that…it seems the servants start all the mischief.

If it wasn’t for the two eavesdroppers, Borachio and Leonato’s man, could this possibly have happened? Most likely not. It may have all gone according to plan otherwise. The Prince may have simply learned of Hero’s feelings for Claudio and set them up to be married. But that wouldn’t be much of a comedy, would it? No, the chaos must insue and all chaos needs catalysts, for which servants provide a wonderful source of such. We see it in Midsummer’s Night Dream with the way Oberon sends Puck to use the potion and he botches it up. Its also seen in Midsummer with the way all the fighting between Oberon and Titania starts with a servant boy that they both want. We see it in Twelfth night with Cesario being Orsino’s servant, which starts all the chaos in that play. It is also seen there with Maria and the way she, along with Sir Toby and Andrew, tricks Malvolio. Servants are what starts all the fun in these comedies. It makes you wonder who are the true servants, and who are the true masters!