Printable View
Probably very true - Sly's opportunism is probably at work here. I mean, if you wake up in a dream and its to your liking, why wake up to reality? The fact that the induction is not "closed off" at the end of the play does leave a big question mark about Sly's "identity" crisis.
Actually thinking about it since Im still reading whats it....12th night theres an example there of a similar thing people being bllinded/ fooled by there desire for a diiferant type of life. Malvoli being fooled . But if you go one step further and I am, Ill say that this is a prettty common theme in shakespare In othello hes afraid hes done just that fooled himself because he loved desdemona so much. In Hamlet theres the theory that he only sees the ghost because he wants to so much...
see where Im going??
I like that. History books tell us that Elizabethans were notorious "ladder climbers" in terms of trying to rise in society (Shakespeare's own desire for a coat or arms and "gentleman" status bear this out). Sly may well represent that Elizabethan desire (though Sly's characterization may also be poking fun at that idea - which strikes me as interesting in terms of who Shakespeare is: I'm currently reading a book about the rival claimant to the title "Shakespeare" - Edward de Vere, the 17th Earl of Oxford. Because the Earl was high-born nobility, it would make sense if he was Shakespeare that he'd make fun of commoners who sought higher nobility. Shakespeare - a commoner - would have been more sympathetic to that plight. While I don't buy that de Vere is Shakespeare, the book is offering info that is rather disturbing in terms of questioning Shakespeare's identity.)
I finally found this thread. I will have to read the two introductions. Not sure I read them before, either. Glad there is still time.
Hi Janine. Yes we have two months per play. I think that's great. I'm not pressured to read it right away. Right now I'm reading Pygmalion for the book of the month forum. I will start this next week sometime.Quote:
Originally Posted by Janine
Hi Virgil,Quote:
Originally Posted by Virgil
Funny, I just took an audiobook back to the library of "Pygmalion". Unfortunately I could not find time to listen to it around Christmas. I did finish my 3rd Lawrence biography. Now reading "Twilight in Italy"....good so far.
Glad this group discussion will be two months, so we have plenty of time and no pressure. I will have to read the introductions and review the play; I read it last year, and saw the film version. Interesting play and quite funny...
Hope to see you in the discussion next week. I won't be able to join in till then either.
Oh cany you pm the name of the book? I love De Vere's poetry, well all that Ive managed lay my hands on:nod:Quote:
Originally Posted by Redzeppelin
Although persdonally I like Marlowe for shakespear better:nod:
The book (a present from Mom for Christmas) is entitled "Shakespeare" by Another Name: The Life of Edward de Vere, Earl of Oxford, the Man Who was Shakespeare. The author's name is Mark Anderson, ISBN# 1-592-40103-1Quote:
Originally Posted by Nightshade
It reads like a biography, but the author notes people, experiences and historical events and how they line up with things in Shakespeare's plays. It's actually frightening to me how much sense this argument makes. Certainly the most convincing "conspiracy" argument I've heard in quite a while. And, while I love Marlowe too (nobody has answered my thread question on Marlowe! :( ), I think he was dead too soon. Ever read The Reckoning, by Charles Nichol? - it's an investigation of Marlowe's death. Fascinating.
Ahh yes but look at t like this Marlowe 'dies" and he was after all a spy and I seem to rember there was somthing odd bout his body when they found him. And then a year or so later up popps this upstart out of kno where who continues in the same thread ( want to say vein< vain? veighn (not sure how its spelt) that marlowe started and no one had heard of him before. If you look at the conspircey the secrecy and dubicity of the tudours its just possible that Marlowe became shakespear....isnt it??
Thanks on glossary...
Printed it off and will use on second read. First read was a hoot & joy.
v
Oh I read the two inductions last night. Frankly I have never understood why they are there. It seems very awkward. I don't care for it.
Can you point it out Night? I don't see what you're talking about. Sly is supposed to be drunk i think.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nightshade
well in the first place his speech is rough , i dont know the rythem changes I think somthing but if you say it ut loud in the beging his speech is harsher and sort of bitty ut towards the end it suddenly more flowwy
if you get my meaning
OK, I'll look back tonight and check.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nightshade
I read the two scenes in the introduction last night. I also wondered what the intent of Shakespeare was in putting these scenes before the play. I imagine when we read the play in depth it will come to us. I liked the way scene two played out with the deception working on Sly, probably because he wanted it to...as someone pointed out...why wake to reality when the dream was much more interesting. I don't recall any other of Shakespeare's plays beginning in this fashion with 2 scenes in an introduction. Could someone tell me if I am wrong about that and point out what plays began similiarly. I don't know if I like or dislike this device, but I thought it was different/unique; it is not yet quite clear to me how it will relate to the rest of the play. It makes use of the concept "a play within a play", which Shakespeare uses often. He did so in Hamlet and also stated in another play that "All the world's a stage". So in this way he is presenting "Taming of the Shrew" as a play set on a stage, perhaps indicating it is not quite reality, but a parable. In reading the play time will tell what Shakespeare's meaning is in full.