As promised . . .

Justice
“No one’s gonna take me alive. The time has come to make things right. You and I must fight for our lives. You and I must fight to survive.” Muse

Was it a tragedy when Hitler died? Was it a tragedy when Stalin died? Was it a tragedy when Hussein died? To some (and they were in the minority), yes . . . but to most, no. Macbeth is misclassified. It is not a tragedy.
The above thesis will be proved in two ways (based on this logical premise: if Macbeth is not a tragic hero then Macbeth is not a tragedy): 1. Macbeth will be compared to the other Shakespearean tragic heroes and heroines (excluding those found in the histories and the tragi-comedies (mainly because they are not classified purely as tragedies)) 2. The first point . . . outside looking in. This point . . . inside looking out. The response that other characters have to the tragic heroes and heroines (and Macbeth) is vitally important . . . because . . . ideas change. people change. everything changes overtime. For example: the lawyer who viewed a production of Twelfth Night in the 17th century. What interested him the most? Malvolio. Fast forward 300 years later and (at least for the class that this paper is written) Malvolio was not the main the focus . . . (Viola was) . . . it’s easy to look at something and say something, but for this . . . something will be looked at and something will be said, but it will be backed by the fictional characters.
A tragedy is often been defined as the fall of a great man (Merriam-Webster, 1)
. . . but what the hell is a great man? More importantly . . . how can one apply that term to anything? too subjective . . . so that’s where the concept of tragic hero comes into being. A tragic hero can’t be extreme (can’t be too good– can’t be too bad) because a tragedy lives on audience reaction. People often get mad when they see good people suffer for no reason (no one seems to like to be reminded that “the rain falls on the just and unjust”). But at the same time there’s no catharsis when a bad person gets what’s coming . . . A tragic hero? talented person who makes a mistake and pays and pays and pays . . . but the mistake aspect must be looked at . . . the tragic hero does not realize it’s a mistake (either through some tragic flaw or something outside of the hero’s control). (Brown 1-5)
In Titus Andronicus, the tragic hero (Titus Andronicus) brings his downfall upon himself. He is too steeped in tradition, honor, and pride . . . tradition made an enemy out of Tamora. Honor and pride made him turn against his country for his family to seek revenge. He lost two sons and daughter on this quest and the main reason: pride and family honor. (Bedingfield 969)
In Romeo and Juliet, the tragic characters are victim of things outside of their control. They can’t control their feuding families. And their suicide was mostly accidental. Romeo wouldn’t have killed himself if he thought Juliet was alive and she wouldn’t have killed herself if he didn’t. (Lawlor 46-48 taken from Bloom’s Notes)
In Julius Caesar, Brutus was a good man, constrained by his morality. Brutus thought he was doing the right thing by killing Julius Caesar. He was trying to save Rome. His morals saved Antony. His morals allowed Antony to speak at Caesar’s funeral. These two mistakes put him a corner and he fought. (Nuttall 111-116, taken from MCI Julius Caesar) Lost his wife and ultimately killed himself. Brutus was a victim of his own conscience.
In Hamlet, Prince of Denmark, the tragic character (Hamlet) is forced onto to a path of vengeance. Hamlet’s downfall? He thought too much . . . he was too smart . . . he kept going back and forth and back and forth and when he finally decided to fully commit himself, it was too late. (Bedingfield 1093 and Hazlet 26, taken from Bloom’s Major Tragedies)
In Othello, the Moor of Venice, the main character (Othello), is a great man, good warrior, and devoted husband, but he falls . . . he is a victim of jealousy more it’s more than that . . . he’s a victim of self doubt . . . he’s doesn’t think he’s good enough for Desdemona which is why he gives into jealousy. Where does the self-doubt come from? It comes from the racists around him . . . He’s a victim of himself and society. (Hecht 123-126 taken from MCI Othello).
In King Lear, the tragic character (King Lear) falls mainly through stupidity . . . it was a bad idea to divide the kingdom into threes (or eventually halves). He should’ve realized the true character of his daughters. He should’ve also realized that one can give up power and hope to keep it too. It’s just one bad mistake after another which can be attributed to just stupidity and narcissism. (Booth 70 taken from MCI King Lear)
In Timon of Athens, the tragic character (Timon) falls because of many reasons . . . He’s too generous and he thinks that everybody’s like him so when his finances fail, no one will help him. He loses everything, but most important he loses his trust in mankind. He should’ve picked better friends and listened to his servants. He falls because he is a poor judge of character.
In Antony and Cleopatra, Antony falls because he betrays himself and the Roman ideal. He falls in with Cleopatra and even comes to love her, but he forsakes his family and his country for this love. And when the country needs him, he’s torn between what’s right and his love and in choosing love, he falls because he’s not true to himself.(Bayley 97-98 (taken from MCI Antony and Cleopatra)
In Coriolanus, the tragic character (Coriolanus), falls because of a couple reasons: 1. his distaste for the common people 2. he was just too good to the play the game of politics. Coriolanus would rather be right than win and this entrenched, inflexible ideal cause his downfall.
Macbeth is unlike any of the other characters in Shakespeare’s tragedies. Unlike Titus or Coriolanus, Macbeth has no honor (as seen by killing his king). Unlike Hamlet or Brutus, Macbeth had no morals. His morality never restrained him from acting. (Brandes 80 taken from Bloom’s Shakepeare’s Tragedies) Macbeth didn’t fall because of someone else (like Antony or Timon). It can be said that his wife had some influence on him, but that influence pretty much after he had already committed himself. Macbeth was not a victim of circumstances outside his control (like Romeo and Juliet) because he brought the consequences of his actions upon himself. Macbeth was never betrayed by someone else or let emotions rule him (like Othello and King Lear). Macbeth was set up as a bad character (unlike all the other ones); therefore, Macbeth is not a tragedy because he is not a tragic hero. (Bedingfield 1255-1266 and Felperin 157-160 taken from MCV Tragedies)
One way to define a tragedy is by (like I say earlier) the characters within the fiction. Audiences’ catharsis can change but that which is written cannot.
What was the last thing said about Titus?
“Oh, grandsire, grandsire! Ev’n with all my heart
Would I were dead, so you did live again!
Oh, Lord, I cannot speak to him for weeping.
My tears will choke me if I ope my mouth.” (TA 5.5. lines 172-176)
What was the last thing said about Romeo and Juliet?
“A glooming peace this morning with it brings;
The sun for sorrow, will not show his head.
Go hence to have more talk of these sad things.
Some shall be pardoned, and some punished;
For never was a story of more woe
Than this of Juliet and her Romeo.” (RJ 5.5 lines 305-311)
What was the last thing said about Brutus?
“According to his virtue let us use him,
With all respect and rites of burial.
Within my tent his bones tonight shall lie,
Most like a soldier, order honorably.
So call the field to rest, and let’s away
To part the glories of this happy day.” (JC 5.5 lines 76-81)
What was the last thing said about Hamlet?
“Let four captains
Bear Hamlet, like a soldier, to the stage,
For he was likely, had he been put on,
To have proved most royal; and for his passage,
The soldiers’ music and the nrite of war
Speak loudly for him,
Take up the bodies. Such a slight as this
Becomes the field, but here shows much amiss.
Go bid the soldiers shoot.” (H 5.2 lines 397-405
What was the last thing said about Othello?
“Myself will straight aboard, and to the state
This heavy act with heavy heart relate.” (O 5.2 lines 381-382)
What was the last thing said about King Lear?
“The weight of this sad time we must obey;
Speak what we feel, not what we ought to say.
The oldest have borne most; we that are young
Shall never see so much nor live so long.” (KL 5.3 lines 329-332)
What was the last thing said about Timon?
“From niggard nature fall, yet rich conceit
Taught thee to make the vast Neptune weep for aye
On thy low grave, on faults forgiven. Dead
Is noble Timon, of whose memory
Hereafter more.” (TA 5.4 lines 77-81)
What was the last thing said about Antony?
“She sall be buried by her Antony.
No grave upon the earth shall cli[ in it
A pair so famous. High events as these
Strike those that make them; and their story is
No less in pity than his glory which
Brought them to be lamented.” (AC 5.2 lines 358-363)
What was the last thing said about Coriolanus?
“My rage is gone,
And I am struck with sorrow. Take him up.
Help, three o’th’ chiefest soldiers; I’ll be one.
Beat thou the drum that it speak mournfully;
Trail your steel pikes. Though in this city he
Hath widowed and inchilded many a one,
Which to this hour bewail the injury,
Yet he shall have a noble memory.
Assist.” (C 5.6 lines153-161)
What was the last thing said about Macbeth?
“Of this dead butcher and his fiendlike queen–” (5.8 line 70)
There was no cathersis towards Macbeth within the play like there was for all the other tragedies.
Macbeth is mis-defined. It is not a tragedy because a great man does not fall and even if the way people look at this play changes, the fact remains within the play there is no tragedy.







Annotated Bibliography

Bedingfield, David. “Introduction to Antony and Cleopatra”. Taken from The Complete Works of Shakespeare, 5th ed. New York: Pearson Education Inc, 2004
Bedingfield, David. “Introduction to Coriolanus”. Taken from The Complete Works of Shakespeare, 5th ed. New York: Pearson Education Inc, 2004
Bedingfield, David. “Introduction to Hamlet, Prince of Denmark”. Taken from The Complete Works of Shakespeare, 5th ed. New York: Pearson Education Inc, 2004
Bedingfield, David. “Introduction to Julius Caesar”. Taken from The Complete Works of Shakespeare, 5th ed. New York: Pearson Education Inc, 2004
Bedingfield, David. “Introduction to King Lear”. Taken from The Complete Works of Shakespeare, 5th ed. New York: Pearson Education Inc, 2004
Bedingfield, David. “Introduction to Macbeth”. Taken from The Complete Works of Shakespeare, 5th ed. New York: Pearson Education Inc, 2004
Bedingfield, David. “Introduction to Othello: the Moor of Venice”. Taken from The Complete Works of Shakespeare, 5th ed. New York: Pearson Education Inc, 2004
Bedingfield, David. “Introduction to Romeo and Juliet”. Taken from The Complete Works of Shakespeare, 5th ed. New York: Pearson Education Inc, 2004
Bedingfield, David. “Introduction to Timon of Athens”. Taken from The Complete Works of Shakespeare, 5th ed. New York: Pearson Education Inc, 2004
Bedingfield, David. “Introduction to Titus Andronicus”. Taken from The Complete Works of Shakespeare, 5th ed. New York: Pearson Education Inc, 2004

All these introductions are great. On a side note that has absolutely nothing to do with my paper, the introduction covers a few different live performances (on stage or movie) just to show how the actors can really really change these plays. I mean you can read a play, but watching is completely different and how you take things is more based on director and actor interpretation. Another cool thing about these introductions is the fact that the history of the story is also shown (Shakespeare was a this and took most of his plots from other things), but it’s cool to see the original story and how Shakespeare changed it. These introductions are also good small main character studies.

Bloom, Harold. Bloom’s Notes: William Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet. New York: Chelsea House Publishers, 1996.
Bloom, Harold. Comprehensive Research and Study Guide: Bloom’s Major Dramatists: Shakespeare’s Tragedies. New York: Chelsea House Publishers, 2000.
Bloom, Harold. Modern Critical Interpretations William Shakespeare’s Antony and Cleopatra. New York: Chelsea House Publishers, 1988.
Bloom, Harold. Modern Critical Interpretations William Shakespeare’s Coriolanus. New York: Chelsea House Publishers, 1987.
Bloom, Harold. Modern Critical Interpretations William Shakespeare’s Hamlet. New York: Chelsea House Publishers, 1986.
Bloom, Harold. Modern Critical Interpretations William Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar. New York: Chelsea House Publishers, 1988.
Bloom, Harold. Modern Critical Interpretations William Shakespeare’s King Lear. New York: Chelsea House Publishers, 1986.
Bloom, Harold. Modern Critical Interpretations William Shakespeare’s Macbeth. New York: Chelsea House Publishers, 1987.
Bloom, Harold. Modern Critical Interpretations William Shakespeare’s Othello. New York: Chelsea House Publishers, 1987.
Bloom, Harold. Modern Critical Views William Shakespeare the Tragedies. New York: Chelsea House Publishers, 1985.

I always like using Bloom’s books. Everything in them isn’t always useful, but every book has atleast four or five or more critics’ essays. So you definitely get more bank for your buck. And even if not everything is inherently useful for a topic, it does give a lot if ideas and insights.

Brown, Larry. “Aristotle on Greek Tragedy” May 4 2008. http://larryavisbrown.homestead.com/Aristotle_Tragedy.html

This was a pretty good site and it’s my professor so it more legit . . . it’s also has more than what I used, I just didn’t find it too useful, but Brown was just what I needed to give an idea of what a tragic hero really is (and therefore a tragedy).

Merriam-Webster online Dictionary. “Tragedy.” May 4 2008.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/tragedy

I always like using Merriam Webster because I think it lends credence to an argument with a dictionary definition.

Shakespeare, William. Antony and Cleopatra. Taken from The Complete Works of Shakespeare, 5th ed. David Bedingfield. New York: Pearson Education Inc, 2004
Shakespeare, William. Coriolanus. Taken from The Complete Works of Shakespeare, 5th ed. David Bedingfield. New York: Pearson Education Inc, 2004
Shakespeare, William. Hamlet, Prince of Denmark. Taken from The Complete Works of Shakespeare, 5th ed. David Bedingfield. New York: Pearson Education Inc, 2004
Shakespeare, William. Julius Caesar. Taken from The Complete Works of Shakespeare, 5th ed. David Bedingfield. New York: Pearson Education Inc, 2004
Shakespeare, William. King Lear. Taken from The Complete Works of Shakespeare, 5th ed. David Bedingfield. New York: Pearson Education Inc, 2004
Shakespeare, William. Macbeth. Taken from The Complete Works of Shakespeare, 5th ed. David Bedingfield. New York: Pearson Education Inc, 2004
Shakespeare, William. Othello: the Moor of Venice. Taken from The Complete Works of Shakespeare, 5th ed. David Bedingfield. New York: Pearson Education Inc, 2004
Shakespeare, William. Romeo and Juliet. Taken from The Complete Works of Shakespeare, 5th ed. David Bedingfield. New York: Pearson Education Inc, 2004
Shakespeare, William. Timon of Athens. Taken from The Complete Works of Shakespeare, 5th ed. David Bedingfield. New York: Pearson Education Inc, 2004
Shakespeare, William. Titus Andronicus. Taken from The Complete Works of Shakespeare, 5th ed. David Bedingfield. New York: Pearson Education Inc, 2004

I think it’s fairly obvious why all these plays are here.

Sparknotes. Antony and Cleopatra. May 4 2008. http://www.sparknotes.com/shakespeare/antony.html
Sparknotes. Timon of Athens. May 4 2008. http://www.sparknotes.com/shakespeare/timon.html
Sparknotes. Titus Andronicus. May 4 2008. http://www.sparknotes.com/shakespeare/titus.html

This a great site to go to. The information is almost always spot-on and I think sparknotes are a great tool as a refresher. example: don’t have time to reread the whole work, use Sparknotes, refresh your memory and focus. Justice
“No one’s gonna take me alive. The time has come to make things right. You and I must fight for our lives. You and I must fight to survive.” Muse

Was it a tragedy when Hitler died? Was it a tragedy when Stalin died? Was it a tragedy when Hussein died? To some (and they were in the minority), yes . . . but to most, no. Macbeth is misclassified. It is not a tragedy.
The above thesis will be proved in two ways (based on this logical premise: if Macbeth is not a tragic hero then Macbeth is not a tragedy): 1. Macbeth will be compared to the other Shakespearean tragic heroes and heroines (excluding those found in the histories and the tragi-comedies (mainly because they are not classified purely as tragedies)) 2. The first point . . . outside looking in. This point . . . inside looking out. The response that other characters have to the tragic heroes and heroines (and Macbeth) is vitally important . . . because . . . ideas change. people change. everything changes overtime. For example: the lawyer who viewed a production of Twelfth Night in the 17th century. What interested him the most? Malvolio. Fast forward 300 years later and (at least for the class that this paper is written) Malvolio was not the main the focus . . . (Viola was) . . . it’s easy to look at something and say something, but for this . . . something will be looked at and something will be said, but it will be backed by the fictional characters.
A tragedy is often been defined as the fall of a great man (Merriam-Webster, 1)
. . . but what the hell is a great man? More importantly . . . how can one apply that term to anything? too subjective . . . so that’s where the concept of tragic hero comes into being. A tragic hero can’t be extreme (can’t be too good– can’t be too bad) because a tragedy lives on audience reaction. People often get mad when they see good people suffer for no reason (no one seems to like to be reminded that “the rain falls on the just and unjust”). But at the same time there’s no catharsis when a bad person gets what’s coming . . . A tragic hero? talented person who makes a mistake and pays and pays and pays . . . but the mistake aspect must be looked at . . . the tragic hero does not realize it’s a mistake (either through some tragic flaw or something outside of the hero’s control). (Brown 1-5)
In Titus Andronicus, the tragic hero (Titus Andronicus) brings his downfall upon himself. He is too steeped in tradition, honor, and pride . . . tradition made an enemy out of Tamora. Honor and pride made him turn against his country for his family to seek revenge. He lost two sons and daughter on this quest and the main reason: pride and family honor. (Bedingfield 969)
In Romeo and Juliet, the tragic characters are victim of things outside of their control. They can’t control their feuding families. And their suicide was mostly accidental. Romeo wouldn’t have killed himself if he thought Juliet was alive and she wouldn’t have killed herself if he didn’t. (Lawlor 46-48 taken from Bloom’s Notes)
In Julius Caesar, Brutus was a good man, constrained by his morality. Brutus thought he was doing the right thing by killing Julius Caesar. He was trying to save Rome. His morals saved Antony. His morals allowed Antony to speak at Caesar’s funeral. These two mistakes put him a corner and he fought. (Nuttall 111-116, taken from MCI Julius Caesar) Lost his wife and ultimately killed himself. Brutus was a victim of his own conscience.
In Hamlet, Prince of Denmark, the tragic character (Hamlet) is forced onto to a path of vengeance. Hamlet’s downfall? He thought too much . . . he was too smart . . . he kept going back and forth and back and forth and when he finally decided to fully commit himself, it was too late. (Bedingfield 1093 and Hazlet 26, taken from Bloom’s Major Tragedies)
In Othello, the Moor of Venice, the main character (Othello), is a great man, good warrior, and devoted husband, but he falls . . . he is a victim of jealousy more it’s more than that . . . he’s a victim of self doubt . . . he’s doesn’t think he’s good enough for Desdemona which is why he gives into jealousy. Where does the self-doubt come from? It comes from the racists around him . . . He’s a victim of himself and society. (Hecht 123-126 taken from MCI Othello).
In King Lear, the tragic character (King Lear) falls mainly through stupidity . . . it was a bad idea to divide the kingdom into threes (or eventually halves). He should’ve realized the true character of his daughters. He should’ve also realized that one can give up power and hope to keep it too. It’s just one bad mistake after another which can be attributed to just stupidity and narcissism. (Booth 70 taken from MCI King Lear)
In Timon of Athens, the tragic character (Timon) falls because of many reasons . . . He’s too generous and he thinks that everybody’s like him so when his finances fail, no one will help him. He loses everything, but most important he loses his trust in mankind. He should’ve picked better friends and listened to his servants. He falls because he is a poor judge of character.
In Antony and Cleopatra, Antony falls because he betrays himself and the Roman ideal. He falls in with Cleopatra and even comes to love her, but he forsakes his family and his country for this love. And when the country needs him, he’s torn between what’s right and his love and in choosing love, he falls because he’s not true to himself.(Bayley 97-98 (taken from MCI Antony and Cleopatra)
In Coriolanus, the tragic character (Coriolanus), falls because of a couple reasons: 1. his distaste for the common people 2. he was just too good to the play the game of politics. Coriolanus would rather be right than win and this entrenched, inflexible ideal cause his downfall.
Macbeth is unlike any of the other characters in Shakespeare’s tragedies. Unlike Titus or Coriolanus, Macbeth has no honor (as seen by killing his king). Unlike Hamlet or Brutus, Macbeth had no morals. His morality never restrained him from acting. (Brandes 80 taken from Bloom’s Shakepeare’s Tragedies) Macbeth didn’t fall because of someone else (like Antony or Timon). It can be said that his wife had some influence on him, but that influence pretty much after he had already committed himself. Macbeth was not a victim of circumstances outside his control (like Romeo and Juliet) because he brought the consequences of his actions upon himself. Macbeth was never betrayed by someone else or let emotions rule him (like Othello and King Lear). Macbeth was set up as a bad character (unlike all the other ones); therefore, Macbeth is not a tragedy because he is not a tragic hero. (Bedingfield 1255-1266 and Felperin 157-160 taken from MCV Tragedies)
One way to define a tragedy is by (like I say earlier) the characters within the fiction. Audiences’ catharsis can change but that which is written cannot.
What was the last thing said about Titus?
“Oh, grandsire, grandsire! Ev’n with all my heart
Would I were dead, so you did live again!
Oh, Lord, I cannot speak to him for weeping.
My tears will choke me if I ope my mouth.” (TA 5.5. lines 172-176)
What was the last thing said about Romeo and Juliet?
“A glooming peace this morning with it brings;
The sun for sorrow, will not show his head.
Go hence to have more talk of these sad things.
Some shall be pardoned, and some punished;
For never was a story of more woe
Than this of Juliet and her Romeo.” (RJ 5.5 lines 305-311)
What was the last thing said about Brutus?
“According to his virtue let us use him,
With all respect and rites of burial.
Within my tent his bones tonight shall lie,
Most like a soldier, order honorably.
So call the field to rest, and let’s away
To part the glories of this happy day.” (JC 5.5 lines 76-81)
What was the last thing said about Hamlet?
“Let four captains
Bear Hamlet, like a soldier, to the stage,
For he was likely, had he been put on,
To have proved most royal; and for his passage,
The soldiers’ music and the nrite of war
Speak loudly for him,
Take up the bodies. Such a slight as this
Becomes the field, but here shows much amiss.
Go bid the soldiers shoot.” (H 5.2 lines 397-405
What was the last thing said about Othello?
“Myself will straight aboard, and to the state
This heavy act with heavy heart relate.” (O 5.2 lines 381-382)
What was the last thing said about King Lear?
“The weight of this sad time we must obey;
Speak what we feel, not what we ought to say.
The oldest have borne most; we that are young
Shall never see so much nor live so long.” (KL 5.3 lines 329-332)
What was the last thing said about Timon?
“From niggard nature fall, yet rich conceit
Taught thee to make the vast Neptune weep for aye
On thy low grave, on faults forgiven. Dead
Is noble Timon, of whose memory
Hereafter more.” (TA 5.4 lines 77-81)
What was the last thing said about Antony?
“She sall be buried by her Antony.
No grave upon the earth shall cli[ in it
A pair so famous. High events as these
Strike those that make them; and their story is
No less in pity than his glory which
Brought them to be lamented.” (AC 5.2 lines 358-363)
What was the last thing said about Coriolanus?
“My rage is gone,
And I am struck with sorrow. Take him up.
Help, three o’th’ chiefest soldiers; I’ll be one.
Beat thou the drum that it speak mournfully;
Trail your steel pikes. Though in this city he
Hath widowed and inchilded many a one,
Which to this hour bewail the injury,
Yet he shall have a noble memory.
Assist.” (C 5.6 lines153-161)
What was the last thing said about Macbeth?
“Of this dead butcher and his fiendlike queen–” (5.8 line 70)
There was no cathersis towards Macbeth within the play like there was for all the other tragedies.
Macbeth is mis-defined. It is not a tragedy because a great man does not fall and even if the way people look at this play changes, the fact remains within the play there is no tragedy.







Annotated Bibliography

Bedingfield, David. “Introduction to Antony and Cleopatra”. Taken from The Complete Works of Shakespeare, 5th ed. New York: Pearson Education Inc, 2004
Bedingfield, David. “Introduction to Coriolanus”. Taken from The Complete Works of Shakespeare, 5th ed. New York: Pearson Education Inc, 2004
Bedingfield, David. “Introduction to Hamlet, Prince of Denmark”. Taken from The Complete Works of Shakespeare, 5th ed. New York: Pearson Education Inc, 2004
Bedingfield, David. “Introduction to Julius Caesar”. Taken from The Complete Works of Shakespeare, 5th ed. New York: Pearson Education Inc, 2004
Bedingfield, David. “Introduction to King Lear”. Taken from The Complete Works of Shakespeare, 5th ed. New York: Pearson Education Inc, 2004
Bedingfield, David. “Introduction to Macbeth”. Taken from The Complete Works of Shakespeare, 5th ed. New York: Pearson Education Inc, 2004
Bedingfield, David. “Introduction to Othello: the Moor of Venice”. Taken from The Complete Works of Shakespeare, 5th ed. New York: Pearson Education Inc, 2004
Bedingfield, David. “Introduction to Romeo and Juliet”. Taken from The Complete Works of Shakespeare, 5th ed. New York: Pearson Education Inc, 2004
Bedingfield, David. “Introduction to Timon of Athens”. Taken from The Complete Works of Shakespeare, 5th ed. New York: Pearson Education Inc, 2004
Bedingfield, David. “Introduction to Titus Andronicus”. Taken from The Complete Works of Shakespeare, 5th ed. New York: Pearson Education Inc, 2004

All these introductions are great. On a side note that has absolutely nothing to do with my paper, the introduction covers a few different live performances (on stage or movie) just to show how the actors can really really change these plays. I mean you can read a play, but watching is completely different and how you take things is more based on director and actor interpretation. Another cool thing about these introductions is the fact that the history of the story is also shown (Shakespeare was a this and took most of his plots from other things), but it’s cool to see the original story and how Shakespeare changed it. These introductions are also good small main character studies.

Bloom, Harold. Bloom’s Notes: William Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet. New York: Chelsea House Publishers, 1996.
Bloom, Harold. Comprehensive Research and Study Guide: Bloom’s Major Dramatists: Shakespeare’s Tragedies. New York: Chelsea House Publishers, 2000.
Bloom, Harold. Modern Critical Interpretations William Shakespeare’s Antony and Cleopatra. New York: Chelsea House Publishers, 1988.
Bloom, Harold. Modern Critical Interpretations William Shakespeare’s Coriolanus. New York: Chelsea House Publishers, 1987.
Bloom, Harold. Modern Critical Interpretations William Shakespeare’s Hamlet. New York: Chelsea House Publishers, 1986.
Bloom, Harold. Modern Critical Interpretations William Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar. New York: Chelsea House Publishers, 1988.
Bloom, Harold. Modern Critical Interpretations William Shakespeare’s King Lear. New York: Chelsea House Publishers, 1986.
Bloom, Harold. Modern Critical Interpretations William Shakespeare’s Macbeth. New York: Chelsea House Publishers, 1987.
Bloom, Harold. Modern Critical Interpretations William Shakespeare’s Othello. New York: Chelsea House Publishers, 1987.
Bloom, Harold. Modern Critical Views William Shakespeare the Tragedies. New York: Chelsea House Publishers, 1985.

I always like using Bloom’s books. Everything in them isn’t always useful, but every book has atleast four or five or more critics’ essays. So you definitely get more bank for your buck. And even if not everything is inherently useful for a topic, it does give a lot if ideas and insights.

Brown, Larry. “Aristotle on Greek Tragedy” May 4 2008. http://larryavisbrown.homestead.com/Aristotle_Tragedy.html

This was a pretty good site and it’s my professor so it more legit . . . it’s also has more than what I used, I just didn’t find it too useful, but Brown was just what I needed to give an idea of what a tragic hero really is (and therefore a tragedy).

Merriam-Webster online Dictionary. “Tragedy.” May 4 2008.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/tragedy

I always like using Merriam Webster because I think it lends credence to an argument with a dictionary definition.

Shakespeare, William. Antony and Cleopatra. Taken from The Complete Works of Shakespeare, 5th ed. David Bedingfield. New York: Pearson Education Inc, 2004
Shakespeare, William. Coriolanus. Taken from The Complete Works of Shakespeare, 5th ed. David Bedingfield. New York: Pearson Education Inc, 2004
Shakespeare, William. Hamlet, Prince of Denmark. Taken from The Complete Works of Shakespeare, 5th ed. David Bedingfield. New York: Pearson Education Inc, 2004
Shakespeare, William. Julius Caesar. Taken from The Complete Works of Shakespeare, 5th ed. David Bedingfield. New York: Pearson Education Inc, 2004
Shakespeare, William. King Lear. Taken from The Complete Works of Shakespeare, 5th ed. David Bedingfield. New York: Pearson Education Inc, 2004
Shakespeare, William. Macbeth. Taken from The Complete Works of Shakespeare, 5th ed. David Bedingfield. New York: Pearson Education Inc, 2004
Shakespeare, William. Othello: the Moor of Venice. Taken from The Complete Works of Shakespeare, 5th ed. David Bedingfield. New York: Pearson Education Inc, 2004
Shakespeare, William. Romeo and Juliet. Taken from The Complete Works of Shakespeare, 5th ed. David Bedingfield. New York: Pearson Education Inc, 2004
Shakespeare, William. Timon of Athens. Taken from The Complete Works of Shakespeare, 5th ed. David Bedingfield. New York: Pearson Education Inc, 2004
Shakespeare, William. Titus Andronicus. Taken from The Complete Works of Shakespeare, 5th ed. David Bedingfield. New York: Pearson Education Inc, 2004

I think it’s fairly obvious why all these plays are here.

Sparknotes. Antony and Cleopatra. May 4 2008. http://www.sparknotes.com/shakespeare/antony.html
Sparknotes. Timon of Athens. May 4 2008. http://www.sparknotes.com/shakespeare/timon.html
Sparknotes. Titus Andronicus. May 4 2008. http://www.sparknotes.com/shakespeare/titus.html

This a great site to go to. The information is almost always spot-on and I think sparknotes are a great tool as a refresher. example: don’t have time to reread the whole work, use Sparknotes, refresh your memory and focus.

John Milton's Paradise Lost

I don't know much about this text but I did take the course for six or eight weeks before I stopped going and failed . . .

so here it goes

best line ever: "Better to reign in Hell than serve in Heaven"

(getting a tattoo of that with my tax refund by the way . . .)

but think about it . . .

Satan lost

and he's still unbowed and unbroken

keeping up the fight

you can beat me down

but you can't break my spirit

it's worth of admiration

the response will be limited to Book I (because it's the one I've read and know the most about and also because the character of Satan goes downhill as the book (or epic rather) progresses)

"And shook the throne. What though the field be lost?

All is not lost; the unconquerable will,

And study of revenge, immortal hate,

And courage never to submit or yield:

And what is else not to be overcome?

That glory never shall his wrath or might

Exhort from me. To bow and sue for grace

With suppliant knee, and diefy his power."

http://video.google.com/videosearch?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rls=HPIB,HPIB:2006-35,HPIB:en&q=filter's+hey+man+nice+shot&oe=UTF-8&um=1&sa=N&tab=wv&oi=property_suggestions&resnum=0&ct=property-revision&cd=1

click on that above link and watch the video and listen to the song . . .

it explains alot

I love rooting for the underdog, but at the same time I like rooting for the cocky underdog; I love the underdog who gets his ass kicked and doesn't learn anything and just says: "next time . . . "

I also have an independent streak (don't tell me something's wrong just because it's against the law . . . I make my own rules and decide what's right or wrong and don't expect me to feel bad or sorry when I am right- I'll accept the consquences, but that's about it . . .) so I really identify with this (what do you expect? I come from Rebel blood. (be it Irish, Scottish, or Southerner . . .)

"A mind not changed by place or time.

Can make Heav'n of Hell, a Hell of Heav'n,

What matter where, if I be still the same,

And what should I be, all but less than he

Whom thunder hath made greater? Here at least

We shall be free;"

Still defiant, but admire the philosophy. I had friend who told once that she loved living in her head. You can always make the glass half-full; you can be in a completely different place inside your head and I think that's true outside of extremes (Nazi concretion camps for example) . . .

I'm a casual student of religion and a somewhat more serious casual student of Christianity, and I love Paradise Lost. Milton really did his homework . . . (his portrayal of most of the demons is spot on and concurrent with the myths) and making Satan some sort of hero/anti-hero was genius . . .

Margaret Cavendish's "The Poetess's Hasty Resolution"

Here we will go
Here we will go
Here we will go now . . .

"Reading my verses, I liked them so well,

Self-love did make my judgment to rebel.

Thinking them so good, I thought more to write;

Considering not how others would them like."

Just like any writer (or poet for that matter) . . . everything is a masterpiece. And that fact overrides everything (much like with me and my skit)- even others.

"I writ so fast, I thought, if I loved long

A pyramid of fame to build thereon.

Reason observing which way I was so bent,

Did stay my hand, and asked me what I meant;"

Show me a writer that doesn't want fame (or to be remembered . . . ) and I'll say that person is a liar . . . but there's always obstacles to doing anything

"Will you, said she, thus waste your time in vain,

On that which in the world in the world small praise shall gain?

For shame, leave off, said she, the printer spare,

He'll lose by your ill poetry, I fear."

It's impossible to please everybody and this detractor (who may or not be a friend) is in the way of the narrator's dreams . . .

"Besides the world hath already such a weight

Of useless books, as it is overfraught,

Then pity take, do the world a good turn,

And all you write cast in the fire, and burn."

pretty mean . . . love that second couplet though

"Angry I was, and Reason struck away,

When I did hear, what she to me did say.

Then all in haste I to the press it sent,

Fearing persuasion might my book prevent."

Interestingly enough . . . the narrator lost confidence, but anger (good all anger) enabled the narrator to still follow her dream.

"But now tis done, with grief repent do I,

Hang down my head with shame, blush, sigh, and cry.

Take pity, and my drooping spirits raise,

Wipe of my tears with handkerchiefs of praise."

Kind of pathetic but it works because it forces the readers to feel for the narrator (no one likes cocky people (which is why Chris Dougherty got sent home on American Idol even though he was probably the best -too cocky))

As a whole . . . find this interesting because it is very feminine especially at the close and it's kinda nice to see something from this time with a woman's touch. Also like the fact that reason was a her- nice touch

Sir Walter Ralegh's "Methought I saw the grave where Laura lay"

No need to break this poem apart (although it is pretty cool that the book happened to fall on a poem about the Fairy Queen):

"Methought I saw the grave where Laura lay,

Within that temple of vestel flame

Was wont to burn; and passing by that way

To see that buried dust of living fame,

Whose tomb fair love and fairer virtue kept,

All suddenly I saw the Fairy Queen;

At whose approach the soul of Petrarch wept,

And from thenceforth those graces were not seen,

For they this Queen; in whose stead

Oblivion laid him down on Laura's Hearse.

Hereat the hardest stones were seen to bleed,

And groans of buried ghosts the heavens did pierce;

Where Homer's sprite did tremble for grief,

And cursed th' access of that celestial thief."

To be honest, I don't like this sonnet; it doesn't seem that well-crafted . . . and Spenser never finsihed his epic . . . I wonder if Ralegh would have still written this if he would have known that

. . . Did Petrarch write epics (I don't know . . . I assume he did since there is that comparsion)

Took me awhile to get the title . . . but I get and it's a great jab . . . Petrarch is dead . . . welcome the new and the better: Spenser!

Homer is better than Spenser in my belief, but I won't fault Ralegh for that . . . at least Ralegh admits to what Spenser is: a mimic.

I also find it odd that Ralegh didn't use the Spenser's spelling for the Fairy Queen. How can you praise something and not at least spell it the same way the author does (I remember Tolkein had a fit when the publishers tried to change his plural spellings for dwarves and elves (which are now the accepted way) . . . I would take Ralegh more seriousily if he mentioned something about the cantos (or at least used some of Spenser's archiac spellings)

Edward Hyde's From The History of the Rebellion

Best comic strip ever by the way (at least since Calvin and Hobbes and Peanuts)

and look at me look at me ("i can ride a bike with no handlebars" - anyone who can tell me who sings that (without cheating) gets a free drink at Hemingway's!)

and to relate this to the material . . . Oliver Cromwell is not as lucky as Lio . . .

I found this a very interesting read . . . especially since the author was an opponent of Cromwell. It seems as if this a very praiseworthy piece; but at the same time, it's not . . . it seemed like the author tried to be fair . . .

Latin shit (and Italian?) that I like with a translation . . .

ne inimici quidem possunt, nisi ut simul laudent (Whom not even his enemies could curse without praising him)

Ausum eum quae nemo auderet bonus, perfecisse quae a nullo nist a nullo nisi fortissimo perfici possunt (He dared undertake what no good man would have tried, and triumphed where only the strongest men could have succeeded)

And the author uses the word wick so often I can't tell if he means it in a good or bad way . . .

But it was cool to find out that England's enemies feared him.

And Cromwell was a smart man . . . the commonwealth is what matters and how dare judges and lawyors opposse him on principles sence they serve with his blessing . . . a very fearful autocratic idea . . . (that's still used today . . . I personally prefer freedom over security . . . )

I really like the last line:

"In a word, as he had all the wicednessess against which damnation is denounced and for which hellfire is prepared, so he had some virtues which have caused the memory of some men in all ages to be celebrated, and he will be looked opon posterity as a brave, bad man."

Like that . . . mizture of revulsion and respect which you really do not see to often especially when one man is the enemy of the other . . .

Ben Johnson's "Epitaph on S.P., a Child of Queen's Elizabeth's Chapel"

i'll divide this into fours for better analyzation . . .

"Weep with me, all you that read

This little story

And know for whom a tear you shed,

Death's self is sorry."

So . . . this child (who acted in Ben Johnson's troupe for three seasons) died . . . and not only is he upset, but the readers should be upset and even Death is upset.

"'Twas a child that so did thrive

In grace and feature,

as Heaven and Nature seemed to strive

which owned the creature."

Ok . . . the child was so wonderful that Heaven and Nature (even though they "owned" him) sought to emulate him.

"Years he numbered scarce thirteen

When fates turned cruel,

Yet three filled zodiacs had he been

The stage's jewel;"

The death of a child is horrible and evenmoreso in this case because he was the star (or at least Ben Johnson says he was)

"And did act (what now we moan)

Old men so duly,

As, sooth the Parcae thought him one,

He played so truly."

The child was the envy of those even with more experience . . . and this envy even transcending the mortal world because even the Fates were impressed.

"So, by error, to his fate

They all consented;

But viewing him since (alas, too late)

They have repented"

The Fates made a mistake, but since the the child was so "everything" they wanted to keep him.

"And have sought (to give new birth)

In baths to steep him;

But, being so much too good for earth,

Heaven vows to keep him."

The boy is just too perfect for this earth . . .

I really liked this poem . . . I think Ben Jonson did this boy a great service. My only question is why did Jonson use initials instead of the boy's full name? What is the style of epitaphs back then? the fact that Ben Jonson used initials is really my only problem with the poem. It makes me think that he didn't know the boy's name . . .

John Donne's "The Undertaking"

For this . . .
I'm going to interpret this poem, stanza by stanza . . .

"I have done one braver thing

Than all the Worthies did,

And yet a braver thence doth spring,

Which is, to keep that hid."

So . . . the narrator has done something greater than the the nine heroes of old and from that something even greater than that happened . . .

"It were but madness now t'impart

The skill of specular stone,

When he which can have learned the art

To cut it, can fine none."

The narrator knows a lost secret, but it's pretty pointless because it doesn't work anymore . . .

"So, if I now should utter this,

Others (because no more

Such stuff to work upon, there is)

Would love but as before."

I think this is about just admiring craftmanship or pretty things and it doesn't matter if can't be done anymore. The "others" aren't concerned with the process; they're just concerned with the finished product.

"But he who loveliness within

Hath found, all outward loathes,

For he who color loves, and skin,

Loves but the oldest clothes."

To carry the conceit further . . . men should not be concerned with the trappings of women (or the process) which makes them beautiful because the real beauty is in the color and the skin . . . and at least with the oldest clothes (because they're probably a bit tattered and whatnot) one can still glimpse what lies beneath.

"If, as I have, you also do

Virtue attired in woman see,

And dare love that, and say so too,

And forget the He and She;"

The point of this is respect. Women are virtuous, so don't break that . . . don't ruin that (for if you love what lies beneath then you're a bit forced to love the outer (with the conceit, you can admire the finished product; but at the same time, you're forced to admire what makes it so)).

"And if this love, though placed so,

From profane men you hide,

Which will no faith on this bestow,

Or, if they do, deride;"

What's the point of sharing this new thing with the players and the pimps and the one-night stand kind of guys. They don't get it . . . they don't understand . . . so what's the point?

"Then you have done a braver thing

Than all the Worthies did;

And a braver thing will spring,

which is to keep it hid."

A gentlemen doesn't kiss and tell and I think that's the point of this poem, but I like the fact of how Donne explains it. You love something so much, you just want to spread it to the world (every detail). but . . . love requires you to not do that and it's hard sometimes . . . but . . . it's a braver thing than all the worthies did . . . to give into love . . . and still have respect for your love a the same time . . .

Lucy Hutchinson's :" From Memoirs if Colonel Hutchinson"

Since I am so far behind in my blog posts . . .
and wanted to look at new things . . .
I have decided to treat my textbook like my pastor told me to treat the Bible.
When you have problems trying to read it . . . just drop and read where it lands . . .
I found this really interesting . . .
look at this line: "My lord, hearing that there was some question concerning the county's powder, I am come to kiss your lordship's hands, and to beseech you that I may know your desires and intents are concerning it?"
This whole thing astounds and confounds me . . .
The Puritans are being harassed and they are about to be defenseless; yet, their leader is so polite and formal. It blows my mind. I mean this is taken from a diary so it's gotta be at at least somewhat factual. It almost came to blows . . . but the Colonel and the Lord acted like gentlemen the whole time.
I like this because it takes me back to the stuff I read about the South in the 19th century. The shit is hitting the fan, but they still act like gentlemen.
This colonel reminds me of the Hemingway hero: "Grace under pressure".
This passage almost seems more tense because it's so formal and polite . . .
And I also find it really interesting that (because of politics) this book wasn't published until the early 1800s. What little I know of the Puritan Revolution, I know it was bad (sorta like an early less extreme (more right then left) French Revolution), but I would have thought that old wounds would heal a little quicker than that.

in defense

ok . . . my skit did not go as well as I thought it would . . .

but i swear, I sold the idea to many friends and family and they all liked it (with the exception of mother (should of listen to her . . . )

but listen . . .

Shakespeare's plays were like the adult swim or south park

they were naughty . . .

they were bad . . .

I tried to have the same effect but amping it up . . .

people use to drink and throw things and make fun of the actors and get into fights (it was like a viewing of the Rocky Horror Show)

the only difference between my jokes and Shakespeare's is the fact (outside Shakespeare's genius) that most people don't get the penis or sex jokes or anything else because it's 400 years old . . .

I was trying to have fun . . .

and I felt like I was in high school again with people looking at me in disbelief . . .

but listen to this:

"These gatherings had been the ocassions of frays and quarrels, evil practices of incontinency in great inns; the playes published uncomely and unshamefast speeches and doings, withdrew the Queen's subjects from divine service on Sunday's and Holidays, wasted the money of the poor and fond persons, gave opportunity to pick pockets, utter busy and seditious matters, and injured and maimed people by falling of their scaffolds and by weapons and powders used in plays" what the Common Council thought of plays (taken from the general introduction of the Complete Works of Shakespeare, editor David Bevington 5ed)

I had all that in mind when I did my skit . . .

wasn't trying to be a smartass or jackass

everything had purpose

just trying to mimic what Shakespeare would have been like in the Renaissance era

well at least I took a risk, had a bit of fun and went down in flames

after a long haitus . . .

I'm going to discuss Lanyer's "The Description of Cooke-ham . . .
I didn't really get this poem until the very end of class . . .
I didn't see how the Lanyer stole the kiss from the tree (until Dr. Kilgore pointed it out). Cooke-ham was dying, but a kiss from"that grace where perfect grace remained" (who "walk, with Christ and his apostles there to talk") would've save Cooke-ham. Lanier (according to the introduction) had a very hard life after she left Cooke-ham. An illegitimate child. No patrons. Poor. And come to think of it, she didn't really live up to the ideal she expoused either. It's no wonder she looked back at Cooke-ham favorably.
Look at the last lines . . . (after the stolen kiss I see something a bit different)
"Whose virtues lodge in my unworthy breast,
And ever shall, so long as life remains,
Tying my life to her by there rich chains"
The footnote says that the chains mean virtues, but I disagree.
Point 1- the lady of Cooke-ham showed, but did not deliver the good life to Lanyer so she is ever longing, ever-seeking, trying to get above her station (i.e. bound by rich chains).
or point 2- the stolen kiss doomed her life and now she must reap the conquences (i.e. still bound by rich chains.)

What the hell part 2

Well it only took me twenty minutes to sign in this time- yippee!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Anyways, on to utopia . . .

What the hell was the point of Utopia? What was More's purpose? Honestly it was worse than the Communist Manifesto (not going to use Italics this time- take that evil blog of doom . . .) At least Marx talked about revolution.

"Workers arise. You have nothing to lose but your chains."

In no way did More talk about how Utopia was founded. There are no instructions for creating Utopia.

Ok . . .

It's a satire meant to show how bad things were and how things could be better, but what's the point. He wrote in Latin and what was the literacy rate at that point in time? The only people who could read it were the ones that had the most to lose if something like Utopia was in place. Utopia appeals to the poor and oppressed. How many poor and opressed people read More's book? He appealed to the people in power.

And he refuted. Probably because he did so to save his neck.

Yet

He died because he did not proclaim the king as the head of the church

so he had convictions.

But Utopia was not one of them apparently

This book is political and economical, but it falls short because it didn't really influence the society at the time.

What the hell?

3

Firgured out why tab doesn't work: it's impossible to set up indentation so I think form here on out I'm going to focus less on the style and format of this thing and just post the assignments . . .

So, since we discussed post-modernism in class today, I decided to give my take . . . Firstly, in no ways or means is my view even validated (I mean I’ve only taken modernism and post-modernism). It’s not like I’ve written a thesis or done heavy research, but here it goes. I didn’t really like Mr. Kilgore’s description of post-modernism and how it can be found in any literary movement (such as the Renaissance) that preceded before it. Work with me here . . . I’m going to use a garden metaphor (like one More loved to use). Just because a few things sprouted out from the garden that weren’t intended (such as a weed or flower or bug or anything) does not mean that those little bits are indicative of the period. I can see how traces of mindset and philosophy can sorted be traced back, but that’s only when looking at post-modernism from a societal perspective as opposed to just looking at the literature side. There are two things that set post-modernism aside from its predecessors: Community and style. What was the last great generation of writers? The Beat Generation? And before that? The Lost Generation? Due to technology and rising standards of living (and the academic system), writers no longer have a community. Most writers I know are professors at a university and their peers spread out across the US. Now, they still have communication over email, chat, phone, etc. , but its not the same as discussing works face to face. So, in my opinion writers are more isolated which heavily influences post-modern writing. Which leads to the next point: style. Almost everything has been done before, so how is a writer spose to make a name for himself? This what my art history teacher in high school once told me and even though it refers to art, I think it is applicable to writing: “Imagine art as a pie, and almost every piece has been taken, but a few slivers still remain. The artist that finds one of these slivers has just discovered the holy grail.” Post-modern writers are very experimental. For example, the short story “Nebraska” has no plot. William Burroughs liked to throw a lot sentences into a hat, draw them out and that would be his story. Others set up a mystery story where the mystery is never solve. Others use no punctuation. The list goes on and on. Writers, from the post-modern era, use an experimental style to make a name for themselves.

My Hell part 3

There is a reason why one doesn't use mercenaries. You can't control them (look at the Blackwater for example) so the fact that Utopia uses mercenaries seems pretty stupid. Whats the stop those Barbarians from turning on their masters and destoying Utopia? Nothing . . .
I do like the fact that slaves wear gold because if I lived in Utopia I would probably be a slave and at least when I escape I would be rich (and then show the Barbarians my riches and where to get it and destroy my former masters (while heaping a very nice profit.))

My Hell part 2

opps, still can't get this thing, but I've got an idea, maybe I'll just post straight to this (even though I don't like the format), so lets see how it works . . .
(if I hit tab one more time and it brings me down to the labels, I'm going to hurt somebody (probably an innocent bug)).
damnit, it happened again . . .
die, bug, die!
ok . . . getting this figured out . . . for this post, I'm going to discuss why Utopia is my hell.
I'm a liberatarian so Utopia runs contrary to just about everything I believe it . . .
I don't care about equality. People are not equal so don't try to make everyone equal. Just give everyone equal oppurtunity.
What is there to do for fun in Utopia? Music . . . ok. Listening to people talk . . . kinda boring. There's no unrestrained travel. There's no pre-marital sex. There's no fun substances to do if you're bored? No musuems . . . no plays . . . seems rather boring.
How the hell do I turn off the italics? All I wanted to do was mentioned The Prince in the right format.

my hell

2

Sorry, for the long haitus, but I was really hesitant to convert all my posts from Word to notebook to this thing, but this second post only took me three times longer getting it on this blog than it took me to write it so hopefully, I'll be able to streamline this and make it easier for me.

“Whoso list to hunt” is an adaptation/translation by Wyatt of Patrarch’s Rima 190. What does adaptation mean? In my opinion there is a huge difference between a translator and a writer. There is skill in translation, but there is no imagination. It’s kind of cool to read some old school translations of Patrarch, but translators aren’t real poets because (unlike other poets) they have something to start with. Now if “Whoso list to hunt” is more of a adaptation than translation then what Wyatt did was butchery. And I find it hard to believe that Wyatt’s poem is about Ann Boleyn. Here is a modern translation of Rima (which I’ve just recently learn is Italian for sonnet):
A snow white doe in an emerald glade
To me appeared, with antlers soft of gold,
And leapt two streams, under a laurel's shade,
By sunrise, in the Winter's bitter cold.
To me she treasure seemed so wild as fair
My eyes fell distraught where they fell to stare,
As if, one poor miser in search of gold,
I might relieve my grievances of old.
I spied round her neck, "No one dares touch me",
Graven in topaz and diamond stones,
"For Caesar wills I always shall run free."
The sun had nigh to zenith come, and she
Was gone in a flash, lost in its pale gleam.
While I chased her still, I slipped in the stream!
Richard Vallance 2002

What is the real difference? There’s a deer. And the hunter can’t take it because it belongs to Caesar. The real poet for “Whoso list to hunt” is Patrarch, not Wyatt. Now whether or not Petrarch’s Rima 190 applied to Wyatt’s life is a different story, but I don’t see much difference between the two translations which means Wyatt’s text is more of a translation and not an adaptation.

Memento Mori- remember we are mortal . . .

Cvv 32 54

I’ll leave that part there above since apparently my Chinchilla, General Lee, wants to help

me write this . . . Phew, I thought those weekly responses were bad- now I have to do a blog (it’s

kinda weird)- good idea, I guess, but still . . . kinda weird. Let’s see . . . Han Holbein’s The

Ambassadors . . .

Well first . . . the skull is a reflection, but a reflection of what? The artist? The noble? The

priest? The crucifix? It’s a bit early for the god is dead theme and Holbein was religious[1] . . .

Another interesting thing, mathematicians seem to really like this painting . . . apparently . . .

most things have a 27 degree angle. 9 is the trinity times itself and 27 divided by nine equals the

trinity.[2] The lute has a broken string which has been used as a symbol for death and discord.

[3] The skull divided the two friends perhaps showing how the advances in science are against

the church (or despite having knowledge (be it scientific or religious) we still die)).[4] The

crucifix is partly hidden perhaps to show that even if we ignore God- He still sees . . .

Next . . . Mr. Kilgore said to excel in the court one had to be more than just bookish (for

example one had to know how to dance) which makes sense since the term Renaissance Man

means to excel at everything (no matter what it is) and I haven’t really heard the term

Renaissance Woman which I guess shows the “uninvolvement” (don’t know about this because I

haven’t read a lot of Renaissance lit) of women during this time.

[1] The fact that Holbein was religious taken from: http://www.newcastle.edu.au/school/fine-art/arttheoryessaywritingguide/analysisofhansholbeinstheambassadors.html
[2] Mathmatical theory taken from: http://www.amazon.com/Ambassadors-Secret-Holbein-World-Renaissance/dp/1852854472
[3] Symbolism taken from: http://arthistory.suite101.com/article.cfm/symbols_in_art
[4] The fact that the two in the portrait were friends taken from the same website as the first footnote.