Elizabethan Shakespeare Help!

[Ozzma]

Hello everyone, I am in dire need of some assistance in generating ideas for a term paper on Shakespeare in the Elizabethan era. The paper must be 10 pages long, we were given topics but I can not seem to narrow down to a thesis. We must stick with the plays studied so far in the term, which is Comedy of Errors, Titus Andronicus and Richard III.
The class was given the options of analysing the use, function, significance of comedy in his tragedy plays (Titus Andronicus), the same goes for an element of medieval inheritance in one of his plays. A last topic of studying the transformation of his source materials in references to one of the plays, and analyse the changes and consequences.

Anyways, can anyone give me some assistance? I feel so overwhelmed with Shakespeare.

[Calidore]

Hello everyone, I am in dire need of some assistance in generating ideas for a term paper on Shakespeare in the Elizabethan era. The paper must be 10 pages long, we were given topics but I can not seem to narrow down to a thesis. We must stick with the plays studied so far in the term, which is Comedy of Errors, Titus Andronicus and Richard III.
The class was given the options of analysing the use, function, significance of comedy in his tragedy plays (Titus Andronicus), the same goes for an element of medieval inheritance in one of his plays. A last topic of studying the transformation of his source materials in references to one of the plays, and analyse the changes and consequences.

Anyways, can anyone give me some assistance? I feel so overwhelmed with Shakespeare.

Shakespeare can do that. Best place to start would be simply narrowing things down. Have you decided which of the topics and/or plays interests you the most?

[Eman Resu]

The Comedy of Errors - unless memory fails me entirely - was neither ever performed nor published until well after the close of the Elizabethan Period, so in terms of the assignment as you've couched it above, it's not even a contender, and given that His Yawnfulness Lord Sir William Brian Vickers and that whole blue-striped-shirt-with-white-collars-and-cuffs crowd at the Institute of English Studies have all but proven that George Peele was the author of Titus Andronicus, it sounds like you're stuck with the comedic elements of Richard III. While I recall faintly having detected the beginnings of a smirk at a few of the Duke of Buckingham's lines, it was many years ago, and I could well have simply have imagined it.

I might consider having a discreet chat with the Professor so as to understand precisely what "Shakespeare in the Elizabethan Era" is intended to convey in terms of the thesis. Some wise old Scots rancher once said, "when you feel sheepish, don't be a sheep."

[Ozzma]

Shakespeare can do that. Best place to start would be simply narrowing things down. Have you decided which of the topics and/or plays interests you the most?

I'm leaning towards Titus Andronicus while looking at how his source material (Ovid's Metamorphosis, Seneca's Thyestes) is reflected in the play and how Shakespeare tries to out do the his predecessors by expanding/doubling/worsening elements. However, I haven't formulated any kind of argument/thesis and I'm still not sure if I can muster 10 pages, let alone 10 good pages.

And to Eman Resu: My professor never even mentioned what you say about Comedy of Errors or even that Peele was the author of Titus Adronicus. This is news to me! Ha! The joys of being an English undergraduate. And by Elizabethan Era, the course is "Elizabethan Shakespeare", so the works he "wrote" whist under the reign of Queen Elizabeth.

[MorpheusSandman]

Titus Andronicus is hilarious if read as a parody of revenge dramas. It's so over the top violent it's like a Chan Wook-Park or Takashi Miike film.

[Ozzma]

Titus Andronicus is hilarious if read as a parody of revenge dramas. It's so over the top violent it's like a Chan Wook-Park or Takashi Miike film.

Absolutely, but could I argue that it is seen as the runt of Shakespeare's work? Or maybe show that in the violence, that there is some sort of "greatness" or "sign" of a literary genius? I'm pushing it here I think, I've been at this for a few hours, reading and researching through the library on in scholarly journals, I have not found anything concrete.

[Charles Darnay]

This is all sorts of incorrect.

As ofr the OP: your assignment is very open-ended. You can use Shakespeare's bringing Ovid onto stage in Titus as a way to explore how Shakespeare's corruption of his source is reflected in the corruption of deeds i nthe play.

Or, as Morpheus suggests, explore the comedy of Titus: many agree that it is a parody.

Or, explore how Richard III perverts history.

Or how about how Comedy of Errors introduced the second set of twins and what this did to the play - not as interesting.

There are so many options here.

[Eman Resu]

And to Eman Resu: My professor never even mentioned what you say about Comedy of Errors or even that Peele was the author of Titus Adronicus. This is news to me! Ha!



Read a little on Edward Ravenscroft's remarks made in the seventeenth century. Despite this being a Wiki article, spend five minutes reading through it as time allows:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorship_of_Titus_Andronicus

.

[Calidore]

Titus Andronicus is hilarious if read as a parody of revenge dramas. It's so over the top violent it's like a Chan Wook-Park or Takashi Miike film.

One opinion I've read is that Shakespeare was a young playwright wanting to get noticed and so deliberately wrote an over-the-top hoot for that purpose.

Eman: Vickers and others have used textual similarities to argue for Peele's authorship of four of the play's fourteen scenes, not claiming that he authored the entire play. Ozzma should still be safe going that route.

[*Classic*Charm*]

The Comedy of Errors - unless memory fails me entirely - was neither ever performed nor published until well after the close of the Elizabethan Period, so in terms of the assignment as you've couched it above, it's not even a contender, and given that His Yawnfulness Lord Sir William Brian Vickers and that whole blue-striped-shirt-with-white-collars-and-cuffs crowd at the Institute of English Studies have all but proven that George Peele was the author of Titus Andronicus, it sounds like you're stuck with the comedic elements of Richard III. While I recall faintly having detected the beginnings of a smirk at a few of the Duke of Buckingham's lines, it was many years ago, and I could well have simply have imagined it.

I might consider having a discreet chat with the Professor so as to understand precisely what "Shakespeare in the Elizabethan Era" is intended to convey in terms of the thesis. Some wise old Scots rancher once said, "when you feel sheepish, don't be a sheep."


Given that the professor has included these three works in the syllabus for the class, your points are moot, and the OP is welcome to explore any of them.

[MorpheusSandman]

Absolutely, but could I argue that it is seen as the runt of Shakespeare's work? Or maybe show that in the violence, that there is some sort of "greatness" or "sign" of a literary genius? I'm pushing it here I think, I've been at this for a few hours, reading and researching through the library on in scholarly journals, I have not found anything concrete.The only way I think you could argue that Titus has a sign of greatness or literary genius is in Shakespeare's already apparent knowledge of the genre he's working in, what the audience expects, and his willingness to play with (or prey on) both that tradition and expectation. Alfred Hitchcock once said he enjoyed playing audiences like a piano; I can't help but think Shakespeare thought the exact same thing.