No Subject

[miss]

I agree in the state of the marriages, I find Shakespeare has forced them to remain in the tragdicomedy genre. I think the Duke proposal is a device by Shakespeare to keep it in the comedy genre and therefore I personally find the ending unsatisfactory. Come on Isabella you "virtuous maid" don't fall into the folly of marrying the conniving Duke. (although my opinion of her did falter when she agreed to plan against innocent, naive and rather stupid Mariana - that the real test came to suspending my disbelief.)<br><br>I also find the role of women a particularly interesting topic, like other Shakespeare plays the women are often viewed lowly, and not half as superior as men. But actually I do disagree with your analysis of the particular Juliet passage, I think she has to be worse than Claudio, to repent on religious grounds as she is not paying her penitence by death but by her confession and regret. Therefore she probably feels more guilty as she is not being killed but mutally agreed to consumating the marriage before the dowry came as she loved Claudio so much (a usual accepted modern day occurance.)

[Unregistered]

i would argue that the female characters in any of the canon are 'not half as superior' to the men.if one reads the plays it is evident they are not only devilishly intelligent and quick witted, but complex and strong. they most usual route for any female character in the text to take when the going gets rough is verbal eloquence (one could argue against that in the case of kate when she goes to cuff petruchio, but one needs only look at the speed of her replies indicated by the pentameteric half lines to see how much brain power she has) perhaps you mean to say that their social status is lesser: or perhaps you intend to refer to the size of the roles...i am baffeld further by the notion that juliet is in some way 'worse' than claudio in her repentance..dose this indicate that she is in some way weaker as she compromises herself by repenting while he will die for his sin? i think you are forgetting he is willing to let his sister burn in eternal damnation to avoid death: a notion the elizabethians took very seriously.<br><br>my curiosity is also piqued by the notion that the 'ideas' behind the play - whatever you take them to be( first comment)?? are not methodically conveyed? since when as drama been methodical? the suspension of logical progression is what seporates art form the rest of narrative: we would not find it at all interesting if we had no gaps to fill in - but however, the question you put out there cannot be answered until you let us know what ideas you think he was trying to convey. further - what do you mean when you assert he failed to convey these ideas through verse? i am baffled. after all, 70% of the canon is in blank verse - are you asserting that in this case the verse fails somehow? or are you refering to the words not the form? <br><br>i am interested in your feeling that the play in unsatisfactory as it tries to retain the comedy genre. its a bone ocf contention, isnt it? however, as with all of the canon, being the most complex of texts, there are many many ways one can read it which make it more palitable. for one thing, as is widely noted, isabella does not reply to the duke when he asks for her hand. one can argue she does not consent to be wed. for another, one can look at the dukes role as both spiritual leader, judicial leader and puppeteer - he continues to force the power of the state onto the couples at the end - so while the play retains a comic form, it aptly points out the nature of power and the state..one can contextualise the work, as it could be read politically as a veiled comment on the hypocricy of the church and the state - take your pick. there are many reeadings which allow for the ending, one could assume that he used the form antithetically to make a point.......you can't be litteral and look for some pat answer whatever themes or ideas you personally find with shakespeare - its way too complex for the methodical conveyance of 'ideas': there is no a to b to c - but many many paths and themes in there. he reflects human nature in a way no other writer has ever touched. tell me what's methodical about us?

[Unregistered]

the marriage ending is quite contrived.<br>however ... we're not CERTAIN that isabella accepts the duke's proposal.<br>

[smon]

i think the play is quite flawed in terms of conveying the ideas in a fully clear and methodical manner, and how he tried to convey them through verse. there are very deep issues at work, but also it appears as if shakespeare remembers intermittently that the play is supposed to be a comedy, for example: (almost) all the characters are to be wed at the end of the play, but the reasons behind some of the marriages are unclear - i don't fully understand why vincentio proposes to isabella. what do you think?<br><br>another thought: juliet's admission of her sin and saying that hers is worse than claudio's - does this show anything about the status of women of the day? were they supposed to be (or just appear) more pure, and expected to behave in a proper, religious fashion all the time?<br><br>i would really appreciate any comments and ideas on this - my mind can't seem to expand outside the box, so to speak.