The Tempest

[whiteangel]

I havent read all of shakespears plays to consider The Tempest as the best. I was forced to read the tempest for a A level exam and to be honest, didnt like shakespeare's work beforehand. however, in reading the tempest i understood why people call him a "genius". i tought the play was very interesting, and perhaps people find it difficult to understand the plot because shakespeare while writting it was bound by the "Three Greek Unities" and therefore could have no subplot and thus was very limited in what he wrote. he had to intertwine each individual plot with the main...(Prospero's revenge) and rember that it was vital that all took place on the Island and revolve around the protaganist Prospero. due to this, maybe there was confusion in the plays essential plot itself....
i agree with those who said the ending was rushed, in the sense that Prospero is convinced by Ariel and forgetts that usurpation he suffered in the space of 1 hour.
i do not belive that prospero didnt create "Love" in between Miranda and ferdinand. the question really comes down to, if one belives that there really is any love between Miranda and Ferdinad or if it is simply sexual attraction...this instant attraction to one anther is evident when miranda calls ferdinad a "sprit" and a "temple" and he her a "godess". pysical attraction is masked as love in the tempest.
as far as saying Prospero "loved Miranda" i personaly dont agree...he treats her like a second class citizen and constantly refers her as some kind of material possesion or worth, going as far as calling her as his "rich gift" and owning her.
Freudian school of thought would also argue that Prsperos intenstions for Miranda are not as "fatherly" as the seem, infact freud agrues that Prospero secretly lusts after Miranda and that is why he hates Caliaban so much and abuses Ferdinand.....he is jelous....
as always opinions along with theories and interpretations differ and vary....

[Compost]

I'd suggest that the point and purpose of the play is to demonstrate the qualities of a virtuous ruler (observe Portia's speech on mercy in "MoV" to see how Prospero fits the bill perfectly of her hypothetical, merciful monarch) and to expose our own sanguinary delights. As an audience we expect / demand bloody satisfaction, and we never receive it. Prospero considers his own culpability in the genesis of his affairs (observe his ownership of Caliban, his "thing of darkness") and elects to hug it out to end, once and for all, the cycle of violence and viciousness; this is the symbolic function of Miranda and Ferdinand's marriage (a successful union of two families, unlike the ill-fated "R&J").

Our disappointment and bewilderment at the resolution of the play says more about human nature than could a speech or contrived unknotting of the conflict. This wouldn't be the first time that Shakespeare indirectly turned his critical gaze on his audience (consider the human touch W.S. gives Shylock and the hypocrisy that he endows his Christian characters with).

"The Tempest" is one of Shakespeare's best (in an unconventional way) but least understood plays.

[faithosaurus]

This has got to be my favorite one by William Shakespeare. I love how it's a drama/comedy (especially the comical parts with Stephano, Trinculo, and Caliban). I just loved the whole plot of it.