The Winter's Tale - Act II

[papayahed]

I'm thinking that Act II shows how easy it was for Leontes to jump to conclusions, how easy it is to see things that aren't there:

Camillo was his help in this, his pander:—
There is a plot against my life, my crown;
All's true that is mistrusted:—that false villain
Whom I employ'd, was pre-employ'd by him:

[Quark]

I'm thinking that Act II shows how easy it was for Leontes to jump to conclusions, how easy it is to see things that aren't there:

He's just repeating himself by this point, though. His jealousy reached its highest pitch in Act I in his asides and conversation with Camillo. By now it seems like he's cooled somewhat, and his fevered tone has been replaced by a cold, cynical language. Before he was outraged by new ideas, but now they're commonplaces to him. "Of course Camillo would revolt!" he seems to say. When he gets to the part you quoted:

Camillo was his help in this, his pander:—
There is a plot against my life, my crown;
All's true that is mistrusted:—that false villain
Whom I employ'd, was pre-employ'd by him:

it's like he just repeating the conventional wisdom. What's new in Act II is that he's starting to bring his accusations out into the open. The other characters now have a chance to respond, and the byplay between them and Leontes creates the action of Act II.

[papayahed]

But if you look at it, Leontes has twisted things around saying:

Camillo was his help in this, his pander:—
There is a plot against my life, my crown;

If I'm not mistaken isn't he accusing Camillo of working for Polixenes and the two plotted to kill Leontes?

[Quark]

If I'm not mistaken isn't he accusing Camillo of working for Polixenes and the two plotted to kill Leontes?

But did you think that Camillo's flight was really going to make Leontes see the truth? Leontes is so far gone by this point that when he accuses Camillo it isn't really shocking. That's why I say it doesn't express a new side of Leontes when he attacks Camillo.

[papayahed]

But did you think that Camillo's flight was really going to make Leontes see the truth? Leontes is so far gone by this point that when he accuses Camillo it isn't really shocking. That's why I say it doesn't express a new side of Leontes when he attacks Camillo.

That's not what I said at all. I'm saying that Leontes is so far from thinking correctly he has accused Polixenes and Camillo of the very thing that he has done. In the quote Leontes says "there is a plot against my life, my crown" He is accusing Polixenes and Camillo of plotting to kill him when in fact Leontes is the one that did the plotting.

[Quark]

That's not what I said at all.

Sorry, I didn't mean to twist your words or anything like that. I was just trying to point out that Leontes's jealousy is nothing new at this point in the play. When you said:

I'm thinking that Act II shows how easy it was for Leontes to jump to conclusions

It sounded as though you were arguing that Leontes jumping to conclusions is something unique to Act II, or that Act II is primarily concerned with Leontes jumping to conclusions. I don't know if you meant it that way, but that's the impression I got. That's why I wanted to make it clear that--while, yes, Leontes's accusation of Camillo is new--Leontes's assumptions are not unique to this part of the play. Also, I was hoping to deflect the conversation away from a discussion of Leontes jumping to conclusions--which we've already talked about some--and toward a discussion of Leontes's differences between Act I and Act II--which no one has really commented on yet.

Unfortunately, I'm not going to be doing much commenting today because of the extreme heat here. When it cools down tonight I'll pop in and see what's going on.

[papayahed]

It sounded as though you were arguing that Leontes jumping to conclusions is something unique to Act II, or that Act II is primarily concerned with Leontes jumping to conclusions. I don't know if you meant it that way, but that's the impression I got. That's why I wanted to make it clear that--while, yes, Leontes's accusation of Camillo is new--Leontes's assumptions are not unique to this part of the play. Also, I was hoping to deflect the conversation away from a discussion of Leontes jumping to conclusions--which we've already talked about some--and toward a discussion of Leontes's differences between Act I and Act II--which no one has really commented on yet.

I don't know why you can't read my mind?? It seems to me to go from "you're sleeping with my wife" to "you're trying to kill me" is a big leap, it's the first thing that jumps out in Act II, (until of course bad *** Paulina shows up.)

[Quark]

It's been tough trying to post recently. It's been over 90 two days in a row, and my computer is in a poorly ventilated room upstairs. Just checking my email is chore. Hopefully tomorrow won't be so unbearable.

It seems to me to go from "you're sleeping with my wife" to "you're trying to kill me" is a big leap, it's the first thing that jumps out in Act II, (until of course bad *** Paulina shows up.)

Yeah, it's quite a leap. I was just saying that we're probably used to big leaps by this point. We've already seen in Act I how he lept from a hand clasp to Mamillus is Polixenes's son. Wild accusations are just part of Leontes's usual routine by Act II.

[Virgil]

I'm trying to catch up. I was preoccupied with reading The Road and work was demanding the last couple of weeks. Let's see what i can say about ActII.

I definitely agree that Mamillius' story is a playful allusion to the play itself. As helpful commentary in my version of the play noted, it's The Winter's Tale, not A Winter's Tale. some entertaining metafiction, which perhaps helped make performances of this rather tragic play more comedic.

Yes, except he doesn't get very far. We know it will be a sad story because "A sad tale's best for winter" (lI, i, 34) and Mam will tell one of "sprites and goblins." He starts to tell it as you point out CogA, but it gets interupted. In essence, Mam's tale is aborted, very much like his life.

while this is true, the only real tragedy is Mamillius' death.

I support the categorization of tragicomedy for this one.

Only? I don't believe the other tragicomedies have an irreversable event such as the death of a child. To recall a famous speech from McBeth:

Lady Macbeth:
How now, my lord, why do you keep alone,
Of sorriest fancies your companions making,
Using those thoughts which should indeed have died
With them they think on? Things without all remedy
Should be without regard: what's done, is done.
(Macbeth Act 3, scene 2, 8–12 )

What's done is done. It can't be made right. Death is irreversable and an unjust death will never be set right. Can you imagine to the parents the murder of a child? It is forever life altering and no social justice can ever resolve the event. I don't believe any of the other tragicomedies have this type of event.

That's all passed over, though. It belongs to the first three acts, and doesn't enter into the comedy of Acts IV and V much.

So you consider the exile of half your life to be insignificant? I know you're in your early twenties Quark, but imagine being 50 and for 30 years (more than you have currently lived) been forced to be away from what you consder home. I think Shakespeare is purposely selecting events in this play that no level of right at the end satisfies what has occured.

One could say that both the Sicily and Bohemia parts of the play are filled with sadness. I think the overwhelming mood of the play does lean in that direction. Yet, the definitions of tragedy and comedy don't come from mood but rather from plot. The comedic plot involves reconciliations, lovers coming together, antagonists being overcome, and a general sense of a society forming around the protagonist(s). The tragic plot is the opposite in which the protagonist is alienated from society and antagonist(s) win out. The mood usually is more upbeat in the comedy, but nothing in the definition of comedy makes it so. I agree that the play is more sad than happy, but that shouldn't obscure the classification of the plot.

It does reconcile at the end, and given the definitions of tragedy and comedy and tragicomedy, yes this is a tragicomedy. But I think it stands differently from the others.

[egale]

please post your thoughts on act ii of the winter's tale in this thread.

scene i

scene ii

scene iii

i have just opened the literary forum and found this subforum. Since it has already started, may i join? When will this subforum end and much are we supposed to read per week to take part in the forum? I am very interested and would like to know how to start.

Thank you.

[Scheherazade]

Welcome to the Forum, Egale. The discussions are on-going so you can join in any time you feel ready.

[RG57]

I'd like to join in this forum, would be best to start on the present play or start fresh when the next one is selected?

[Scheherazade]

Hello RG,

It is your choice, really. We still have about 3 weeks to go on this play so it you would like, you can read this one too before moving onto the other one.

Looking forward to reading your comments!

[RG57]

Hello RG,

It is your choice, really. We still have about 3 weeks to go on this play so it you would like, you can read this one too before moving onto the other one.

Looking forward to reading your comments!

great, thanks - will throw myself into it tomorrow