The Ol' Swap?

Beatrice: "About midnight

You must not fail to steal forth gently,

That I may use the place."

Diaphanta: "Oh, fear not, madam,

I shall be cool by that time. [Aside] The bride's place,

And with a thousand ducats! I'm for a justice now.

I bring a potion with me; I scorn small fools."

(IV.1.124-130).

I honestly can't believe that Beatrice put Diaphanta in her place! Although this might not be the most interesting passages, I couldn't help but write about how ridiculous this is. However, I am kind of confused as to what Diaphanta's aside is all about: is she saying that she is getting repaid with a thousand ducats? Either way, Diaphanta seems somewhat excited to be swapping places for Beatrice. Additionally, I am more surprised that Diaphanta is looking forward to steal Alsemero for herself...or am I incorrect in this interpretation? 

Enough Already!!!

(All Asides)

Beatrice: "I'm in a labyrinth. What will content him? I would fain be rid of him" (3.iv.72).

Beatrice: "Bless me! I am now in worse plight than I was; I know not what will please him" (3.iv.75-76).

Beatrice: "He speaks home" (3.iv.88).

Beatrice: "The man talks wildly" (3.iv.93).

Beatrice: "Heaven, I doubt him!" (3.iv.94).

Okay, by the time I was done reading this entire page (1629) I was not only exhausted from all the asides, but infuriated. We get the point! I'm wondering if all these asides were introduced for comic relief. Each one (and I believe there are quite a bit more) provide the audience with the sense that Beatrice is an idiot! She starts off by asking this rhetorical question, as if she doesn't know what he really wants. Beatrice continues to throw in these lines relentlessly--but does so after every time De Flores tries to make a move. I would be extremely interested in seeing the rest of the film adaptation, simply because I know how comical this would be. Even though, Middleton was going for a different effect, the dialogue between the two makes them both look foolish. 

A Unique Situation...

Alibius: "Here, I do say, must thy employment be:

To watch her treadings, and in my absence

Supply my place." 

(I.2.37-39).

This is a kind of a funny situation that Alibius is in. He confesses that he has a wife who is much younger than him and is worried that she'll cheat on him while he's away. So to solve this problem, he asks Lollio to watch her "sexual activity?" Although Lollio agrees to do his best, I think that this might be worsening the problem. If I were Alibius, the last thing I would do is let my jealous feelings be known. One can only imagine that there will be some sort of betrayal that is about to ensue, and who knows if that will start with Lollio? However, I can't say that I blame Alibius for being jealous of his wife. In all honesty, there is a good chance that both Antonio and Lollio will try to take advantage of the Alibius' vulnerability. This scene definitely is setting some type of subplot, and I can guarantee that this will be an underlying scenario throughout the play. 

A Genuine Man

Cardinal: "Fail not to come. There is the master key

Of our lodgings; and by that you may conceive

What trust I plant in you.

Bosola: "You shall find me ready."

(V.3.346-349)

I am more impressed with Bosola than the previous act in regards to him "turning over a new leaf." Bosola has made great stride in vindicating himself as a master criminal. Specifically, his previous remarks in Act 4 demonstrated that he was extremely apologetic. But more importantly, actions do speak louder than words; by Bosola taking physical action to plot against those that made him scheme, he is truly emphasizing this idea of sinning. However, now one must consider the argument of whether taking an eye for an eye is moral. Obviously the audience would like to see some idea of closure for the end of the play, and that is about to occur. Nonetheless, the question that now arises is whether Bosola is a better man than Ferdinand for taking action against him? Has he just completely contradicted the entire concept of liberating his conscience? Regardless, his words at the end of this scene convey that he is in fact a genuine person.

The Transformation of Bosola

Bosola: "Never in mine own shape;

That's forfeited, by my intelligence

And this last cruel lie. When you send me next,

The business shall be comfort."

(IV.1.139-142)

Bosola has finally come around, and the above passage is evidence that he has undergone a major transformation in character. Although these specific lines do not reference the exact point I'm making, they are indicator of how Bosola believes that what he is doing is actually wrong. Basically, Bosola does not want to go back to the Duchess as himself because he believes that he has lost her trust. The extent to which Ferdinand has brainwashed Bosola is amazing. I am surprised that Bosola has recognized that he actually values the Duchess--so much that he wants to end the torture. Funny enough, Ferdinand dismisses Bosola's new found feelings. It's ironic that in the next scene, Ferdinand finds himself in Bosola's same position. He feels bad about what he has done. But as another class mate has already mentioned, too little too late. 

Following Ferdinand

Ferdinand: "Let me be ever deaf to't:

One of Pasquil's paper bullets, court calumny,

A pestilent air which princes' palaces

Are seldom purged of. Yet, say that it were true--

I pour it in your bosom--my fixed love

Would strongly excuse, extenuate, nay, deny

Faults, were they apparent in you. Go, be safe

In your own innocency."

(III.1.48-55). 

Again the audience gets this incestuous vibe from Ferdinand in the third act. One can only describe his behavior as being quite bizarre. I find it rather eerie and odd how Ferdinand tells the Duchess to "be safe in [her] own innocency." Obviously, this sentence should be taken with a grain of salt, since Ferdinand is trying to relay a harsh message to his sister. Not to mention, as soon as Ferdinand leaves the room he is extremely quick to make a pass on her guilt. He then further implicates himself in the situation by asking Bosola to spy since she has a "false key into her bedchamber." I think Ferdinand has legitimately gone mad. The fact that Bosola has proposed that the Duchess has had "sorcery" done on her only makes matters worse.

Easy Now Ferdinand

Ferdinand: "Rhubarb, oh, for rhubarb

To purge this choler! Here's the cursed day

To prompt my memory, and here 't shall stick

Till of her bleeding heart I make a sponge

To wipe it out."

(II.5.12-16).

Here we finally see Ferdinand and his outrageous anger/behavior. Not only is he angry, but it appears as though he has become psychotic. However, the entire time the Cardinal is telling Ferdinand to keep his composure. Here is evidence of the dichotomy between the Ferdinand and the Cardinal: Ferdinand wants nothing else but to commit murder, while the Cardinal takes another route by taking self-control. Again, no one can really blame Ferdinand for his quick-thinking scheme. Thankfully, the cardinal puts some sense into Ferdinand and he agrees to do nothing. This is nothing unusual--an overprotective brother wants to seek revenge on the man that impregnated his sister. Ironically however, Ferdinand is not the typical older brother. In fact, he has so much anger that his emotions for her appear to be incestuous. 

Antonio--Good, Bad or Simply Misleading?

Antonio: "I admire it.

In seeking to reduce both state and people

To a fixed order, their judicious king

Begins at home, quits first his royal palace

Of flatt'ring sycophants, of dissolute

And infamous persons, which he sweetly terms

His master's masterpiece, the work of heaven...

(I.1.4-22)

The play opens up with Delio basically singing Antonio's good graces, and ostensibly preparing the audience to accept him as a "good guy." Specifically, Delio praises Antonio for traveling to France to observe and research how nobility should act. Antonio of course responds by saying how great the French king is for ridding the court of "flatt'ring sycophants," and is offering himself to the audience as a trustworthy man. However, I'm interested  in seeing how his character plays out in terms of good vs. evil. Webster has made a concerted effort to convince the audience to be on Antonio's side. Additionally, based on this passage alone, Antonio does appear to be an honest man that may provide an objective viewpoint for other characters in the play; he appears confident and astute in his observations. For instance, he offers the idea that Bosola isn't the greatest of guys near the end of his passage--he's got me hooked already.

Bray vs. Hunt

My initial reaction to Hunt's article was how similar some of his ideas were to Bray's. This might seem like a stretch, and it probably is, but I couldn't help but compare the two documents in terms of "male friendship." After having written the previous paper on the topic of male camaraderie, friendship, etc., I see many of Bray's ideas elucidated by Hunt. Instead of referring to this "tension" between Coriolanus and Aufidius as an unnatural friendship, Hunt characterizes these figures as being complementarity. In class we have discussed the homo eroticism present between the two, and I think Hunt goes one step further by identifying how ironic the situation is. Coriolanus and Aufidius come across as feuding enemies, and then in the end they ambiguously profess affection for one another. 

Too Little Too Late

Aufidius: "My rage is gone,

And I am struck with sorrow. Take him up.

Help, three o' th' chiefest soldiers; I'll be one.

Beat thou the drum, that it speak mournfully.

Trail your steel pikes. Through in this city he

Hath widowed and unchilded many a one,

Which to this hour bewail the injury,

Yet he shall have a noble memory."

(V.6.145-152)

Aufidius ends the play with remorse over the death of Coriolanus. Once again, I find this situation as being extremely frustrating. Aufidius acts as though he had no choice but to kill Coriolanus, and when the deed is done, he begins to feel sorrowful. Many of these tragic endings could be avoided if only people would think before they act. I am curious as to why dramas such as this end with the "villain" feeling sorry for what happened. Moreover, Shakespeare could have concluded the play with the death of Coriolanus, and exclude the input by Aufidius. But I suppose that this situation is similar to Romeo and Juliet: the feuding families, and in this case the feuding towns, may finally have a chance at peace with one another.  

The Ultimate Revenge

Coriolanus: "My birthplace hate I, and my love's upon

This enemy town. I'll enter. If he slay me,

He does fair justice; if he gives me way,

I'll do his country service."

(IV.4.23-26)

Although Shakespeare does not give the reader a heads up so-to-speak concerning Coriolanus's betrayal to his own city, I think it greatly adds to the plot of the story. Thus far, I have thought that the play has been rather slow, and has left me thinking what will actually proceed. Ironically, this point in the play should serve as the climactic moment, and instead it feels as though Shakespeare has merely "slipped" this in. Coriolanus blatantly states that he will take revenge on his own city of Rome and join with Aufidius without showing much emotion. In addition, I can't say I blame Coriolanus for taking such a harsh stance--in all honesty if I was banned from the city that I loved so much, I would have so much anger (this also could allude to me possibly having some anger problems?) Regardless, from here on out I expect a lot of excitement from the play--it is about time.

Suck it up

Coriolanus: "Let them pull all about mine ears, present me

Death on the wheel or at wild horses' heels,

Or pile ten ihlls on the Tarpeian rock,

That the precipitation might down stretch

Below the beam of sight, yet will I still

Be thus to them."

(III.2.1-6)

In my opinion, Coriolanus exemplifies his naivete and immaturity via this passage. He is basically saying that regardless of what the mob does, he will not take back what he said. His ignorance may play a very crucial role in the future of this play. In addition, his overbearing hubris is causing him to form this idea that he is better than everyone else based on his success with the Roman army. Thankfully, his mother steps in and tries to talk him down. She pleads with his stubborn attitude and then finally makes him agree to talk to the plebeians. Volumnia is not only being a good mother in this situation, but to me she is also taking on this pseudo role of being his wife. Moreover, I feel that her ability to talk to him in a sane and comforting manner is something that is often done by a man's lover. Generally, men need women to keep them in check and make sure that they are not out of line. Men have been generalized as being overly egotistic and narcissistic. Coriolanus has fallen right into this category, and thankfully Volumnia has talked some sense into him.

The First Honorable Man I've Seen

Coriolanus: "I do beseech you,

Let me o'erleap that custom; for I cannot

Put on the gown, stand naked, and entreat them

For my wounds' sake to give their suffrage.

Please you that I may pass this doing." 

(II.2.134-138)

This may in fact be the first instance in a drama that we have read where there is this sense of a noble man performing a noble act. Although in the past few tragedies there have been characters seeking vengeance to honor their loved ones, this in my opinion outweighs the former events. Coriolanus has legitimized himself as being an honorable man who actually has the good of the people at heart. Obviously this is a ritual that has been done before, and to see that Coriolanus has the wherewithal to not listen to the others is extremely respectable. I completely agree with his argument as to why he shouldn't show them battle scars. Further, by bragging to the common and poor people about his wounds would be adding insult to injury--it is clear that the peasants have it much worse than any one in the court. 

Where's Our Belly?

Menenius: "The senators of Rome are this good belly,

And you the mutinous members. For examine

Their counsels and their cares, disgest things rightly

Touching the weal o' th' common, you shall find

No public benefit which you receive

But it proceeds or comes from them to you,

And no way from yourselves. What do you think,

You, the great toe of this assembly?"

(Act I.1.146-153).

I really enjoy how Menenius is using this idea of the Senate being a stomach that digests nutrients and returns it back to the people. I chose this passage because I think it is reflective of how a government system should be set up (assuming I am understanding this analogy correctly). Moreover, our government currently doesn't feel that way. The concept of there being a structured higher "power" is to have organization within the community--not just logistically but fundamentally. Considering the current state of our government I find it interesting that I can't really relate what Menenius is saying and apply it to our own higher institution. In fact, I feel that our government is doing the exact opposite of what it should be doing (as everyone already knows and agrees with). But the point of this blog post is not to state the obvious but rather identify how ingenious and effective the Romans actually were hundreds of years ago. Their Senate appeared to be rather democratic and for the people. Maybe I'm wrong.

Enjoyable...

Overall, after reflecting on the movie I have to agree with others on how well the play was adapted. Although one can easily comment on its awkwardness at times and the somewhat overdone 80s punk look, the film leaves the viewer with a certain sense of satisfaction. More specifically, the movie quite successfully portrayed the drama in a clear and understandable fashion--more than the actual text did. Furthermore, I found the text quite confusing and I remember becoming lost in several instances, but the film excellently portrayed subtle nuances that I presumably thought would be impossible to accomplish. For example, I initially was bewildered at how the director would handle the disguises of Vindice, and although it wasn't what I expected, it seemed to have paid off. 

Death to All

Antonio: "How subtly was that murder closed! Bear up

Those tragic bodies; 'tis a heavy season.

Pray heaven their blood may wash away all treason!"

(V.3.147-149). 

I find it very ironic that Vindice and Hippolito are sentenced to death. I have a lot of sympathy for the two of them considering they were doing a deed which they thought was for not only their own good, but for Antonio's too. This is a clear example of what goes around comes around; I honestly never expected this to happen to the two key figures in the play, especially at the very end. Additionally, I'm not sure I think they should have been punished for their crime; or maybe I am simply used to the revenger's getting away with the act that they have just so desperately succeeded in. Further, I'm not sure I understand why Antonio sentences them to death in the first place--is it because he fears for his own life? 

Recipe for a Villain

Lussurioso: "There's hope in him, for discontent and want

Is the best clay to mold a villain of."

(IV.1.53-54)

I chose this passage particularly because of its simplicity and its eloquent nature. I completely agree with this statement in terms of what makes a villain. If one thinks back to any random movie that contains a villain, it isn't hard to decipher their motives. Take any of the Batman movies and this point is extremely clear. Unhappiness and greed are terrific characteristics of a person to drive them to do unimaginable acts of cruelty. As the saying goes, misery does love company, and I think Lussurioso clearly demonstrates this idea within this passage. 

Stupidity Behind Bribery

First Officer: "It shall be done, my lord."

Ambitioso: "Why, we do thank you. If we live to be,

You shall have a better office."

Second Officer: "Your good Lordship!"

...Ambitioso: "Fine fools in office!"

(III.3.24-28)

Despite this passage being extremely unimportant, I thought I would take the time here to comment on the general trend of hierarchy that we have previously discussed in class. Specifically, this is a classic example of a higher ranking official ordering a subordinate officer around but adding in the extra incentive of promotion. Foolishly, these moronic officers believe Ambitioso and react to his guarantee as though it were actually going to happen. I guess the point I am trying to convey here is that lower-ranking people among the social and political ladder will do anything in attempts to reach that higher power (quite an obvious point). I find it comical that these "slaves" of Ambitioso are essentially drooling at the idea of being promoted, while all along Ambitioso is mocking them behind their back. Nuances in the text such as this passage really provide insight into the dynamic between higher and lower ranking figures. But more importantly, I think that we today are not much different from Ambitioso and his mindset. When we want something done efficiently and succesfully we undoubtedly provide some sort of incentive. So although we have discussed in class the motivation to reach the top in Medieval and Renaissance times, we as Americans do not have to look far for a comparison. Political figures are constantly bribing one another to accomplish a set of tasks. It's almost disappointing to realize how little progression, in regards to political dynamics, has taken place within the past few centuries.

Spurio Vs. Aaron

Spurio: "Was I stol'n softly. Oh, damnation met
The sin of feasts, drunken adultery.
I feel it swell me; my revenge is just;
I was begot in impudent wine and lust."
(I.2.189-192)

I'm surprised at how upset Spurio is of being a bastard son. I have never really seen this type of resentment before in a drama. Needless to say it is a great change of pace from the typical love affair-driven revenges that are too often seen. Moreover, this type of anger that Spurio possesses reminds me of Aaron's behavior in Titus Andronicus. Although their personalities are indeed different, I wouldn't be shocked to see Spurio transform himself into this monster who doesn't heed at any obstacle in his way. He is evidently driven in avenging his bastard nature. On another note, I found this soliloquy somewhat amusing and comical--Spurio is ostensibly saying that his father got a woman drunk over dinner and decided to have irresponsible sex. I mean can we really blame the Duke?

Whole is Sum of the Parts

"Representations of corporeality are also central to Titus Andronicus where the body's fragmentation and its loss of coherence acquire a collective perspective and become a synecdoche of political havoc and social dismantlement." Marti

Naturally there were some points that Marti made that I both disagreed and agreed with. However, I really enjoyed reading the above excerpt simply because I think although it might be considered an obvious point to some, Marti does an excellent job in summing up what may be thought of as a difficult concept to grasp. Moreover, at first glance Titus is a heroic soldier that is looked up to by many, and personally I did not want to extrapolate any further claims concerning his stature without any further evidence. However as the drama unfolded the viewer becomes more acquainted with the nuances associated with him; and I fully agree with the statement that he is indeed representative of the politics and the status quo so-to-speak. Without restating what Marti so eloquently put, I would like to point out that the political and societal equilibrium's are vulnerable to the disfigurement of prominent political figures: whether that may be literal disfigurement or not. Therefore, when Titus was foolishly lured by Aaron to cut off his own hand that was very much representative of the possibility of the political hierarchy failing. Titus is a strong, built man and to see him lose what Marti describes as something phallic (his hand) is unsettling for his own sexuality and also for those he leads. So as the title of this blog states, the entirety of political and social status is dependent on the parts that represent it--and that representation happens to be Titus' literally falling apart.