For Monday: A Midsummer Night’s Dream, Acts 4 and 5
Answer TWO of the following...
1. How do the lovers account for Puck’s final ‘trick’ on them in Act
4? Examine closely what answers they
give to Theseus and Egeus’ questions, and whether or not they seem convinced
with the outcome. Also note who speaks
and who doesn’t (or very rarely).
2. In the film, Bottom emerges as a slightly tragic, maybe even noble
figure, despite being the butt (unavoidable pun) of the play’s jokes. Do we see any of this in the final acts of
the play? Is he something of a wise
fool, as we see in many of Shakespeare’s plays...or just a complete ass
(another pun)?
3. Why does Shakespeare stage the actual play within the play, the “tedious
brief scene of young Pyramus/And his love Thisbe”? This creates an interesting moment of meta-theater, since we are watching the audience (Theseus and company) watching the play, all of which is performed for us. Why might he wanted this double level of watching/performing? How might this comment not only the silliness of the play/actors, but also on both audiences (Theseus and us)? Consider the comments the audience makes and why these are important for us to see/hear.
4. Is A Midsummer Night’s Dream a comedy or a tragicomedy by
the final curtain? Are we convinced
that all the confusions are a mere sport, a strange dream that can be laughed
away in the morning? Or is there
something darker and unresolved that lingers even during Puck’s final speech,
perhaps prompting him to say, “If we shadows have offended”? Discuss a specific passage or moment that
might push this play in one direction or the other.
Elyse Marquardt
ReplyDeleteQuestion 1: Lysander explains that he and Hermia came to the wood to escape; Demetrius affirms this by saying that he followed them to get Hermia back and then inexplicably fell back in love with Helena again. However, after the duke and his party head back to Athens, Hermia, Lysander, and Demetrius start saying that they think they all dreamed up what happened last night. Helena only speaks twice during all of this interaction, almost as if she knows what is going on and doesn't want to spoil it by telling everyone else. She just wants Demetrius to continue in his spell-bound love for her and is willing to let sleeping dogs lie.
Question 2: I believe Bottom is a bit smarter than we give him credit. He knows that something wonderful happened last night, and he also knows that he is not clever enough to put it into words. So he doesn't try. He keeps the memory of it in his head so he can tell a better speaker/writer who will put it down on paper for him. I think it's cool that he realizes that something amazing has happened, something so fantastic and miraculous that it can't be talked about flippantly.
This is a great question: is Hermia trying to let "sleeping dogs lie," and hoping for the best, or is she stunned, angry, and/or terrified of what comes next. Even though she's probably relieved that Lysander is back to normal, part of her must be thinking, "what if he really does fancy Helena?" Can a spell make him in love, or simply bring out what he already feels in his heart? Does Shakespeare want us to see these characters as real people, or just types, almost like puppets, so we don't really worry about them? If they are real people (and the play gives them enough life/poetry to be so), we can't simply laugh off Act 4. It's pretty disturbing despite the happy ending that follows.
Delete1. Lysander starts out by saying that “I cannot truly say how I came here.” Then he goes on to say that the only thing he truly knows is that he went into the woods with Hermia to escape. Then Demetrius backs him up and says that he went into the woods because he was told that Lysander and Hermia were escaping and that Helena followed him. The two guys don’t really seem to understand completely what happened and later on neither does Hermia because she said, “Methinks I see these things with parted eye, when everything seems double.” She can’t comprehend what happened in the woods either. Then there is Helena who simply says, “And I have found Demetrius like a jewel, Mine own, and not mine own.” Her answer gives me the feeling that she understands a little bit more than she says, but she got what she wanted, so she is going to drop it.
ReplyDelete2. Bottom is looked up to by his friends and the other people who are in the play. They basically say that no one else is as intelligent as Bottom or as witty, so no one can take his place in the play. To an outsider Bottom looks stupid most of the time. He is a joke and his part in “A Midsummer Night’s Dream” is to be comic relief. The only time that he ever seems to be even slightly intelligent is toward the end when he wakes up from his “dream”. He is usually the type of person who wants to be front and center and have everyone’s attention and he has a great opportunity and doesn’t take it. When he gets back to the other actors they want to know what happens and he says he doesn’t have time to tell them. He understands that what he saw can be better explained a real writer and that it would make a great play. For once he actually does something right.
Great, detailed responses here...Helena is happy to drop it, perhaps, but she knows, on some level, it's 'wrong.' She's stolen a jewel she shouldn't have, and she feels she's cheated Demetrius. Is this fair? Should people's happiness in life be based on a love charm? If we believe in fate, has fate been subverted? Can a forced happy ending still be happy? Hmm...
Delete3. In the text, Bottom seems like a total ass. He seems completely oblivious to the fact their play is ridiculous. His monologue, upon waking, is somewhat insightful and poetic, but I’m not sure that his experience refined him any. He still shows a trademark sign of bad poetry/acting when he goes off on his string of “O” statements on page 77. He seems that he may have forgotten his lines as he says the same thing over and over again.
ReplyDelete4. I have always read this as a comedy. I think reading it as more is possible, but it strikes me a comedy. In the passage where Demetrius says, “my love for Hermia has melted away like snow” on pages 68 and 69, he seems convinced of his love for Helena. At first, I didn’t accept this as a convincing explanation, but then I thought about how quickly he fell out of love with Helena when he saw Hermia. Love potion or not, Demetrius is fickle and love is confusing, so after considering that I was able to accept it as evidence that everything ends happily. I don’t see evidence that there is something deeper or darker going on. But, I would love to have my idea challenged.
Yes, great response--the "O" lines are trademark overacting which Shakespeare and Chaucer employ to mimic the bad actors/poets of their day. Bottom is a lot like many of us; he has honest, real thoughts, but when he has to 'act' he's a clown. He can't figure out how to simply be himself--he always has to be a parody of who he thinks he should be. Thank Goodness, too, since he's much funnier this way!
DeleteAshley Bean
ReplyDelete3. I think it adds another level to the three tiers that Shakespeare has achieved so far. There's the Athenians, the actors, and the fairies. Now just at the last part of the play, he throws us in with Theseus and etc. They comment on it as people might when trying to understand what is happening in a movie or play. Everyone throws in their opinions throughout whether other people want to hear it or not. I think it is also there to help us understand the short play, as well as see what Theseus and the rest think of it.
4. I could almost go either way. Depending on how it is portrayed through actors, it could be completely lighthearted or sinister. I honestly think both parts work together, because it can be shaken off as a strange dream as Puck suggests on the last page in his speech. However, he says this based on him telling the truth, and in my mind, I don't see him as always completely honest. I have a hard time pinning an opinion on Puck, but something doesn't quite seem totally playful in his final speech. It seems like an apology for the entire play. "Sorry to cause so much confusion, but you can just shake it off."
Yes, at the end EVERYTHING is confused, since we're both part of the audience and the 'real' audience watching them watch the actors. It's a triple level of theater and questions who is really performing or watching. You almost expect them all to turn around and start watching us! The audience is making fun of a very silly and conventional play, and yet, it isn't that different than the love comedy of A Midsummer Night's Dream, which is all about love, mistakes, confusions, and lies.
Delete1.
ReplyDeleteThey feel like a strange dream has occurred. Lysander is amazed, almost dazed. Demetrius knows it was some power that made this change, but he is not sure by where this power came from. The women don’t address Theseus or Egeus. As the discuss amongst themselves Demetrious, Hermia, and Helena head up the conversation. They are all trying to find a suitable metaphor for the bizarre feeling they are stricken with.
3. In doing this we have some of the cultural aspects of the Shakespearean time preserved for us. It doesn’t “fit” with the context and time frame of the play, but it affords us the opportunity to see how the characters like Demetrius and Lysander fit with Bottom in this puzzle of social classes. It was endearing to the lower working class characters. I was impressed with their effort despite their lack in ability. For me it wasn’t vilifying for Theseus, Lysander and the rest because they at least let them perform, seizing it as an opportunity to laugh and jest amongst themselves. I find it funny that there were moments when the actors would interact with the audience. I understood the play much better due to the audiences commentary. I wouldn’t of known to take it serious or halfhearted if the play just stood alone. I really want to go watch Act 5 in the film adaptation of this play that we watched in class!
Well, we will watch more of Act 5 in class tomorrow, so your wish is my command! But yes, much of Act 5 is a commentary on acting itself, with the actors breaking the 4th wall, and inviting the audience (us) to identify with the actors 'acting' as the audience. Everything gets confused here much as it did in Act 4.
DeleteKelsey Tiger
ReplyDelete1. The lovers are not real sure what happened, but they account how they first got into the woods. I think they almost mistake it all for a dream. Lysander says, “My lord, I shall reply amazedly…I cannot truly say how I came here.” Demetrius responds with, “My lord, fair Helen told me of their stealth…And I in fury hither followed them, Fair Helena in fancy following me.” I’m not sure if Theseus really seem convinced, but he seems to accept their love and say “These couples shall eternally be knit.” Neither Hermia nor Helena speak while Theseus and Egeus were present.
2. I think for the most part, Bottom is just an ass, but by then end of Act 4 Scene 2 he seems to be somewhat of an honest, noble figure. Throughout the play he seems to always think he can play the part better than anyone else and constantly seems to want the entire spotlight on him. Although in Act 4 Scene 2, he seems to spare us where he was, he says “But ask me not what; for if I tell you, I am no true Athenian…Not a word of me.” Then he proceeds to give guidance to the rest of the cast.
He is honest in that he is the only one who wants to remember, whereas everyone else wants to brush it off. And he goes back to being his "natural" sense, while everyone else has to be something different, at least in part. He gets to speak his own lines unlike anyone else--esp. Tatiana, who is forced to speak sing-song the next two times (and only 2) she speaks in the play.
DeleteDeryk Ronk
ReplyDelete2.) I find it hard to believe that Bottom did any growing up in this play. The reason is because even after he is the ass, he interrupts the play to explain a situation to Theseus. This is something that he would have done before, and he continues to do afterwards. He is a kindhearted man with no brains. If he did any maturing I did not see it much.
4.) This play could be either tragicomedy or comedy. The movie version that we watched in class (and that I bought so I could finish) was a comedy to me. However, the dialogue is much darker in my mind when I read the poem. I could see this being very gloomy and forewarning. I like the comedy better!
True, he doesn't seem to change much, but why doesn't he have brains? In some ways, he speaks some of the wiser lines in the play (though in a silly way, perhaps). Show us where/why you see this.
Delete1. This is kind of just skipped over, really. Lysander admits that he and Hermia were there to run away, Demetrius was there to stop them, and Helena was there to follow Demetrius. The men, however, seem to just completely accept this. Lysander still loves Hermia, or rather loves her again, and Demetrius is back to his "Natural State" of loving Helena, even though this is the first evidence of affection we see toward her from him. The women are more skeptical, comparing their experiences to a dream, or seeing double. Helena even admits that Demetrius is now hers, but he still doesn't feel like hers. She is expecting to wake up and lose him at any moment.
ReplyDelete4. I feel like this play could honestly be either depending on who is performing it. The text itself is open enough that either could technically be a possibility. Things technically have a happy ending, and no one dies for once, but that seems superficial. You can stop there and have a comedy, which a lot of people prefer, or you can keep going and find deeper meaning. If you keep going, you notice that all of the wome are essentially silent now. They have been defeated, humiliated, and perhaps even "put in their place." They all, Titania excluded, got what they wanted, but if you really look they do not seem to be too happy about it. That doesn't seem like a comedy to me...
Great responses--it's a wonderful play, yet so tricky to get a bead on. It could be all in good fun, silly and nonsensical, or it could be dark and cynical about love itself. According to Act 4, love is cruel and tyrannical: you must submit to it or be humiliated/destroyed. There is no middle way, it seems.
DeleteShelby Pletcher
ReplyDelete2) I think Bottom possesses more wisdom than what we naturally assume as the reader. Especially in the scene where Titania expresses her love to Bottom, he seems to have an understanding that she is blind, but is going to enjoy her attention and affections anyway. At least, that's what I got out of the reading. And then, when Bottom wakes up from the dream, he is clearly extremely aware of what a crazy story it is, and leaves it up to his actions to tell it to his friends. However, I do think he is still kind of a moron, but a loveable moron. There doesn't seem to be any character growth whatsoever, but that's okay because I loved him with all of his conceited quirks and flaws.
3) I think this portion of the play provided a different angle for us as the readers, and kind of dictated to us how we might read this story, in all of its tangled, confusing webs. To watch the audience respond, as the audience, I felt like I better understood that this work wasn't to be taken too seriously and it gave me permission to not only laugh at the characters, but laugh with them.
Yes, Bottom doesn't grow or change, despite becoming an ass for much of the play. And yet, his lack of change makes him able to see what really happened and want to remember it, while everyone else seems to shrug it off.
Delete1. In act 4 the lovers “awake” from the trance that they are under and all of them are a little confused. Both Demetrius and Lysander admit that they don’t know what happened exactly, but both are completely accepting of the outcome and still seem to be in love with the ones who they were “entranced” by. However, both Helena and Hermia were both completely dazed by the days events. Hermia admits that it was like seeing double and Helena feels as though she didn’t earn her lover, and directly after both are silenced and neither speak again for the rest of the play.
ReplyDelete3. I think that Shakespeare staged within the actual play, another play to lighten the mood a little. He wanted everything to end well as a comedic play must, and it was beginning to get somewhat dark toward the end of act four. It shows that the actors with in the actual play are light hearted and that they actually laugh and participate in some commentary of the play from time to time. It also helps give us (the reader of the entire thing) some background perspective to know what was meant to be funny, and what is serious. And finally it gives us a nice picture of how the social classes were and how they reacted in Shakespeare’s time.
Good responses: Act V does diffuse the confusing situation in Act 4, though it also comments on it as well. In a way, it's like watching ourselves watch a play, which, though extremely foolish, is only foolish since we're watching others and not ourselves. Were the lovers in Act 3 any more graceful? Hmm...
ReplyDelete