- This topic has 82 replies, 43 voices, and was last updated Mar 5, 2019, 8:51 pm by
.
-
Posts
-
-
-
I would like to write about what “true love” really means and discuss which characters I think portray this description. I also want to write about how when something happens to someone and they don’t act like themselves, they are not really being true to themselves when it comes to anything and specifically love. I want to include the story about Pyramus and Thisbe. I plan on writing about the different couples throughout the play and discuss whether they are truly in love or if they are interested in being together because it benefits them in some way.
-
It sounds like you have some intriguing ideas here, but it looks like you’re still working out details. There’s only so many couples you can discuss, so which ones, in particular, are you starting to focus on? Which scenes in particular have you already considered? In a short essay like this, focus is really important.
You’ll have to nail down what you mean by “true love.” It almost seems like you’re looking at the idea of “truth” more broadly perhaps, which is why you mention characters being “true” to themselves (which includes love).
Some questions that pop into my mind: How will you determine whether or not a character is being true? Will you take them at their word? For instance, when Demetrius says he loves Hermia and hates Helena at the start of the play, how will you determine if he is being truthful? Sure, he’s been in love with Helena before that. Does that mean he wasn’t true then (i.e. can you change your mind or learn something new and still have believed something with all your heart before?). If at the end Demetrius’ love for Helena is by a magic flower, is that no longer true? Does it matter?
Remember to establish a motive, too. Why is it interesting/important to think about this idea of being true to oneself and what does Shakespeare’s play say about it that’s interesting?
-
-
*note: I missed class the day we started talking about essays so if you reply to this please make your comment as explicit as possible to help me understand* The topic I want to focus on for my paper is betrayal. There are three instances of betrayal I can think of without even looking back at the play again so I’m sure once I start looking for more I’ll be able to find them. Right now my ideas are around the betrayal between Egeus and Hermia, Oberon and Titania, and Lysander/Demetrius and Helena/Hermia. I want to explore how each instance of betrayal shaped the events of the rest of the story or how the story could have changed because of it.
-
The theme I would like to write about for essay 1 is also ” Betrayal”.
I think this theme of Betray is seen all over A Midsummer Nights Dream. It seems to me like every relationship seen in the play had some kind of dishonesty going on. Some examples are ; Helena Betraying Hermia by telling Demetrius of hermias plans to escape with Lysander. Oberon betraying Titania by attempting to steal the child from her by making her fall in love with bottom. Hermia betraying her father by choosing Lysander. Titania betraying Oberon by keeping the child away from him. It seems like every relationship in this play had some kind of dishonesty or betrayal involved. I also would like to write on whether or not the magic involved in the story was the cause of some of the betrayal. For example, when Lysander is under the fairy’s spell he acts horrible towards his “true love” Hermia. Was this betrayal due to the magic or not, Shakespeare didn’t tell the audience what the side effects, if any were of the magic so I cant help but wonder if this betrayal of lysander towards hermia was actually his own feelings not the magic.
-
Betrayal is an intriguing way of framing this action, in part because the play is often presented as a love comedy.
It seems like the success of this topic depends on carefully defining what you mean by “betrayal.” Is it a simple breech of trust? Or something else?
For example, who betrays whom in the Egeus/Hermia relationship? Does Hermia betray Egeus by refusing to follow the law and tradition of Athens and by not following her father’s wishes? Or does Egeus betray Hermia for wanting to kill her if she makes different choices?
If you split the baby, and argue that they both betray each other, I wonder if you’re making “betrayal” something as simple as disagreement (i.e. Egeus and Hermia “betray” each other simply by having different expectations?).
How does Titania betray Oberon by not giving him the child that was given to her? Why does she owe Oberon anything? Is it because they are married? If so, why does Oberon not owe her the child, too?
The connection between betrayal and dishonesty is interesting. Certainly lying to someone can be a form of betrayal. Is there something about Egeus offering up his daughter for death that is dishonest? Maybe he doesn’t really want to kill her but just scare her (and can anything in the text be used to make that case?).
-
-
For this paper, I want to discuss how even though love is about forming a relationship it can also bring out the worst in people, causing other relationships to be ruined. One scene I want to focus on is the fight between Helena and Hermia. They start fighting when both Lysander and Demetrius describe their love for Helena. This is what brings out the fight in both of these women, and we see how harsh and tough they can actually be. Hermia is in love with Lysander who now doesn’t love her anymore, and Helena refuses to believe that either man actually loves her. This fight is based on the idea of love, but it actually brings out the worst in both of these women causing them to scream, and call each other names. Another aspect of the play I would like to focus on is the relationship between Hermia and Eugeus. They are having a disagreement because Eugeus wants her to marry Demetrius, but she wants to marry Lysander. This is a good example of how love can ruin relationships because this problem is taking a toll on their relationship, and is actually what causes Hermia to run away with Lysander. Because of her love of Lysander, the relationship of Hermia and her father is now suffering. This can also relate to us today because it can be believed that parents will never approve of the person we actually love, and if our parents do approve it most probably means we do not actually love that person. The last part of this play I would focus on is how Lysander speaks to Hermia when he is in love with Helena. We had not previously seen Lysander as being so harsh, but once he is in love with Helena, that is when he seems like he is at his worst. Just like Helena, he screams and calls Hermia names. This sudden change of character in Lysander is because of his love for Helena, which is the same way Helena treats Hermia when love is the topic of discussion.
-
An at times controversial aspect of most traditional wedding ceremonies includes a family, often represented by a father, “giving” a daughter away to another family. While this is often framed as a “joining” of families, it also represents a breaking of certain bonds, too.
So the way you’re thinking about love as both forming and unforming relationships intrigues me. Often when people get married or move in together, they start to leave their other friends behind as their world re-orients around a new person. It happens again if/when children come back into the picture.
When Helena first reveals the plan to run away, she frames it as “turning away our eyes” from Athens and having to make new friends and “stranger company.” The use of “stranger” is interesting–does it mean “odd” (like I’ll meet weirder people) or is it a play on words with “stranger” meaning “new to me (like, “don’t talk to strangers”)? Is Hermia excited to have to make new friends or does it add to her nervousness?
I might be suggesting, too, that perhaps this is a natural element of relationships and not always a result of love “bringing out the worst” in someone.
-
-
The theme I’m focusing on is social stratification.
Social stratification is a broad term here because there are different characteristics of it that appear throughout MND such as gender, age, political, and ethnic stratification. I believe that it has something to do with the audience. It came to my attention that Shakespeare’s plays were presented to the commons and that anyone could watch his play and enjoy it no matter their background. MND revolved heavily on roles (by roles I mean both acting roles and social roles). Shakespeare was mirroring the way society was like at that time to the audience and incorporated different groups of people from different classes which could possibly explain the reason for its mass appeal.
I want to focus on how Shakespeare meddled with the existing roles of the 17th century to form and depict the foundation of morals, values, and rules that would be used base the plot off of and how he used that to give each character their personality. Social stratification is an essential component of the plot that allowed the story to move forward.
For one, I will be focusing on the ending scene where Theseus decides to pardon the lovers and allows them to get married. This, in my opinion, was an important scene because it shows the distribution of rights and power in both the public and family setting. [Political stratification].
I will also be looking at the mechanicals. Specifically the scenes where they are to perform Pyramus and Thisbe in front of an audience. I’m choosing to focus on them because the text shows a distinction in class and education (judging by the way they refer to the mechanicals) between them and the intended audience (Theseus, Demetrius, Hippolyta, etc.). [Social stratification]
Finally, I will be looking at the relationship between Helena and Hermia as well as the relationship between Egeus and Hermia. [Gender roles].
The conclusion should take it from a broader view and tie up the 3 characteristics together.
-
You have three thoughtful and genuinely interesting analyses here. Each one, I think, could form the basis for this essay. Taken together, though, I think they dilute the power of each other. “Social stratification” seems a bit vague for such a short paper that I don’t think you need to hit class, race, gender, and age.
Two of your ideas relate to the final act, so I’d start there. It’s one of the few scenes (other than Titania’s and Bottom’s) where people from genuinely different classes are together. You have the “mechanicals” who are working-class and they are genuinely reduced to their professions. Their names come from their professions and their not called people, of course, but “rude mechanicals.” The aristocratic leaders are obviously better educated and more cultured, that’s why they can laugh at the play. The aristocrats heckle and make fun of the players, perhaps even hurting the feelings of one (remember moonlight?). We know their talk interrupts the play because several of the players respond to the comments.
What might this scene suggest about how we think of working-class people? Do we imagine that they cannot be “good” at art? Why is someone from the working class not as good an actor? Does this make fun of them? Does it make the aristocrats look good for being mean? Or are they just playing along? Is it like teasing a child? (and what does it mean if the play presents working-class people as child-like?) Or do we sympathize with the mechanicals because of the aristocrats’ heckling?
In the traditional context of this play, remember that the “groundlings,” the poor working-class people who paid the least amount of money, would have surrounded the stage. Clearly, they do love art (they came to a play), so who do they identify with in the scene? Are they hecklers like the aristocrats–is this is opportunity for them to imagine themselves as smarter and more cultured than someone? Or do you think they’d sympathize with the players? They’re not always good, but do the players ultimately prove affecting? If they turn out to be good (at least in parts), does that narrow the difference between high-class and low-class people, suggesting that they each have a capacity for imagination, beauty, etc.
Following this idea, you might want to think about whether Bottom is a hero in this play. What does it mean to make the lowest character the best?
Another thought… maybe revisit the two short parts where Bottom is with Titania and dealing with the fairy servants. How does he treat them (maybe compare it to Theseus)? He’s quite personable, but also loves the lavishness of the opportunity. How might that even be a commentary on the stereotypes around “new money”?
-
-
<span style=”font-weight: 400;”> The theme I’m focusing on is on “True love” which is well known. Shakespeare portrayed romantic love as a blind and irrational. Love can be a beautiful thing that can be both cruel and forgiving. Does love even exist? Ultimately, love drives the play’s entire plot. Even though the troubles start because of romance it really isn’t considered a true love story. I’ll mention the couples who are struggling when it comes to love and how love being repeated is constantly repeated throughout the play. There are romantic situations where there is always something that disrupts the harmony of a relationship.For example like how both Lysander and Demetrius love Hermia who loves Lysander which leaves Helene alone loving Demetrus.In addition to that I can include the story about Pyramus and Thisbe.</span>
-
Being specific is important to the success of this essay, and I notice that you don’t have a lot of detail yet. For instance, is there a particular couple you’re interested in? Or a contrasting pair of couples?
I notice you use several different words related to love (“true love,” “romance”), but I’m not sure if they have the same meaning. What do you mean by “true” love (i.e. what makes it “true” and are there other types of love)? Is romance different than love? Can I, for instance, be romantic without loving someone?
When you write that you’ll “mention” some couples, I hope you mean you’ll analyze and describe how the couples “struggle” with love (what’s the struggle, what’s the hindrance and what meaning does that “struggle” have for us as readers?)
Remember that plot isn’t very important to this assignment. You’re writing for literary professionals, so assume they can read and understand the play (and maybe even have). Therefore it’s not very interesting to tell people that Pyramus and Thisbe have difficulty in their relationship–that’s both an understatement and an obvious fact in the play. More interesting is why Shakespeare chooses that story for the mechanicals to perform. Clearly, Shakespeare wants us to think of the story of P&T in relationship to MND. Try to find those deeper connections than surface similarities such as everyone having a conflict in their relationship (that’s a normal part of life).
-
The theme I choose for “The Midsummer Night” is true love. As the other classmates mention before, true love is blind and irrational or the cause of obstacles. The reason I choose true love as the topic for my essay because this concept is very important to understand and no one in the world can escape from it once they fell in love. I agree love can blind people’s eye and it will cause a lot of trouble, but how we can determine this is true love or not? True love means no matter what happens to the couples, they still want to maintain the relationship and keep the belief they hold from each other. When the couples facing the stress from the parent, they still willing to stand for each other by not ending the relationship. Truth love is you know why you love him. In other words, you love him because of the wealth or the character. Are you actually love others or you just love the feeling to love others. You need to identify clearly are you loving the one that you think the ideal him or the real him. Also, true love is the couples feel comfortable together, but not one side to devote to make you feel comfortable.
-
You need to define “true love” if you’re going to identify it as a theme. You’re writing that it’s blind and irrational–if that’s the case then why bother calling it “true love”? Further, only one character describes love this way, so you should resist globalizing it. Would Theseus agree? Would Hermia? There are probably competing images of love.
Your essay has to be connected to the text with specific lines, passages and scenes.
As you note, a number of students are also working on this topic, so you should look at those conversations for more ideas and advice.
-
-
I would also like to write about “true love” and what is the meaning of it exactly. I would like to compare the beginning of the play, the difference in Lysander and Demetrius love for Hermia. Also to discuss the scene of when they fall in love with Helena instead of Hermia and problems occur. Another interesting love story is between Theseus and Hippolyta. Thesus seems to think it’s true love while Hippolyta seems to have other ideas. The whole play is revolved around love and marriage and what people want, contrasted with what they have to do.
-
-
-
The theme I’m focusing on for this essay is about the obstacles “true love” comes with. Most of the conflict in the play stems from the troubles of romance. The obstacles they face are used to point out the torments and afflictions that those who are truly in love suffer from. Lysander comments “the course of true love never did run smooth,” which was represented throughout the whole play showing different forms of difficulties of love with Lysander and Hermia, Pyramus and Thisbe, and Helena and Demetrius. Lysander and Hermia faced obstacles with marrying each other because Hermia’s father, Egeus wanted her marrying Demetrius and if she didn’t she would have to face death or be a nun forever. Pyramus and Thisbe had a similar situation where their parents forbid their love, but ended up killing themselves for each other. As for Helena and Demetrius’ situation, Helena felt as if she was in love with Demetrius but he wasn’t because he was looking at external features in Hermia and wasn’t loving her for her mind. After the mistake with the flower with the love juice, he found out he was in fact in love with Helena and was no longer for Hermia.<span class=”Apple-converted-space”> </span>
-
As I’ve been pointing out with folks above (and I did in the instructions), you have to define “true love” if you’re going to discuss it. What is true love? How is it different than other types of love? Does it even exist?
When you’re reading, remember that characters may not always be telling the truth or have reasons for saying something at a given moment. So while Lysander certainly argues that he’s never read about a “true love” running smooth, should we believe him in that moment? Is he generally thinking rationally? Is he making sense? Does his idea of true love match yours (if not, then he might not “truly” being in love)?
People can get excited and say all kinds of things. I’ve seen guys/girls relentlessly pursue someone only to stop caring the next. It doesn’t mean they weren’t serious when they told me they couldn’t live without the person… or maybe it does (again, it goes back to your definition of love).
I often view Lysander and Demetrius as young and naive. Now, that’s my reading (although I have textual evidence to support it), but that means that I’m less inclined to take anything either one of them says very seriously. In the same way that Helena talking about love being blind may be saying something very profound, but it also serves her purposes.
One point I notice, too, you write that Demetrius can’t be in love with Helena because he focuses too much on her exterior traits. That suggests that “true” love for you doesn’t involve physical pleasure–to me that sounds like a pretty boring type of love. Where’s the hot and heavy passion? You’re going to tell me that has nothing to do with true love? Hermia practically has to fight Lysander off in the woods–is that a sign their love is impure?
Don’t forget these are supposed to be real people. Put yourself in the positions of these characters or think about what your friends would do. People are complicated beings and so is love. There’s no reason to pretend it’s always like it is in fairy tales (it certainly doesn’t seem so in this one!).
-
-
I think one theme that could potentially work, and kind of includes other motifs that are popular throughout the play, is the concept of fate versus free will, and how I think Shakespeare, at least in this play, is trying to convey how fate actually trumps free will most of the time. Even if it’s not directly fate overtaking free will, I think there’s some strong evidence that lends to the idea that we don’t get to make decisions for ourselves as often as we’d like to think. One way this theme could be supported is the notion that we don’t pick who we fall in love with (Helena with Demetrius, Hermia not being in love with Demetrius but with Lysander). In same cases, the characters literally don’t get a choice because Puck drips the magical flower’s juice into their eyes. We also have other characters forcefully picking significant others, such as Egeus for Hermia, Theseus forcing Hippolyta into marriage.
Moving away from the motif of love, the craftsmen also don’t have much choice in the play, as many of them try to bargain for other roles in Pyramus and Thisbe, but ultimately don’t get to choose.
As for the motive, I feel like this is still very relevant in this day and age, especially for college students. I feel like we all at this age stress about choices we’re forced to make, but also about the things that are out of hands (existential crises are quite common I’ve found, for most of us at least).
-
There’s a complicated metaphor in Moby-Dick where the protagonist explains life as similar to woven fabric made up of three different parts: chance, free will, and necessity. The idea is that we do make choices, but we can’t make all the choices. I need to eat everyday, but I can often choose what I want to eat. If, however, I’ve lost my job and have no money, then my choice is limited significantly. I could have lost that job because of a change in the economy (chance) or because I showed up drunk to work (free-will). The protagonist sees everything as a balance between these three forces.
I mention this because it contrasts with your binary of fate/free will. “Chance” isn’t the same as “fate,” since fate is more linked to destiny and requires an idea that all the universe has a purpose.
What’s the purpose of Puck accidentally getting the magic juice in the wrong eyes? Does the play support the idea that all of this was destined in someway? Are the fairy’s agents of fate?
Or are they agents of chance or chaos? We often accept that the Greek gods were the personification of ideas that the Greeks thought were important. Beautiful Venus is the embodiment of the idea of love. Her son, Cupid, is the embodiment of sexual desire (that’s why his name is “Eros” is Greek). The family connection simulates the relationship between love and sexual attraction. The arrows that Cupid shoots making someone fall madly in love symbolize the insanity of what the Greeks saw as an animalistic sexual attraction. Even the idea of needing to be pierced with an arrow strongly suggests penetrative sex that is assumed in heterosexual relationships.
So I think you should think about what kind of ideas Puck might embody? Oberon accuses him of playing tricks (Puck denies it, but is he the type of person who would lie?). He admits to playing tricks. He’s a “jester to Oberon”–and what role does a jester play? Or is Puck simply embracing of all fun without regard to anything?
Of course, they all come out of the woods and everything goes precisely as planned. Everyone is fine. Puck even talks about this (“Jack will have Jill and nought will go ill…”), but not in very specific terms since he doesn’t use the character’s names. He doesn’t say “Isn’t it good Hermia’s back with Lysander” but rather may imply it doesn’t matter who you get with as long as it’s a member of the opposite sex. Is that the same thing as fate? (Maybe it’s something closer to cultural expectations).
Thinking about the difference between chance and fate might also help you sort out the forced relationships. It seems awful to say that Hippolyta is fated to be forced to marry Theseus. It seems less awful to think she does it because of a combination of free will, chance, and necessity. But what do you think?
-
-
For my essay, I would like to explore the similarities between Demetrius and Lysander as well as the resemblance between Hermia and Helena in both Act I, Scene I and Act III, Scene II. There are many instances throughout the play where Lysander and Demetrius are very similar. In Act I, Scene I, Demetrius is portrayed as someone who, although is the chosen one in Egeus’s eyes, has had a past with other women, as Lysander states, “ Demetrius, I’ll avouch it to his head, made love to Nedra’s daughter, Helena..” (Act I, Scene II, lines 107-108). The same is seen regarding Lysander in Act III, Scene II. He is unfaithful to Hermia, as it states, “ In Helena’s love I yield you up my part; and yours of Helena to me bequeath, whom I do love, and will do till my death (lines 165-167). The interesting part is that both Demetrius and Lysander call each other out about it. One can argue and say that Lysander was only cheating on Hermia because he was under a spell, and therefore he’s not very similar to Demetrius in that regard. However, when comparing both Act I, Scene I and Act III, Scene II, there are numerous instances where Lysander and Demetrius express characteristics of aggression towards Hermia/Helena and to each other.
I also noticed that Helena and Hermia are pretty similar, as well. For starters, they each experience the love of their life cheating on them. Demetrius expresses his love towards Hermia and not Helena in Act I, Scene I, and Lysander expresses his love to Helena and not Hermia in Act III, Scene II. As a result, both Helena and Hermia become insecure. Helena starts to doubt her beauty in Act I, Scene I, and Hermia begins to fear that her short stature is what veered away Lysander in Act III, Scene II. These are just some examples of how these characters resemble each other throughout the play. I would like to delve further into this topic and develop my essay based on that.
-
These are great examples and I think the specificity with which you’re thinking is going to help you.
Something that’s always struck me is the fact that both boys never question their own change of mind. They are so confident of their feelings that they don’t even worry why their opinions have changed.
I think all that’s missing for me at this early stage is to consider what these similarities mean. Why would Shakespeare create these couples that are so interchangeable? What comment does this make about lovers? Or young lovers? Does this put a pin in the idea that there’s one single person out there for everyone?
-
-
The Side Effects of Love
I cannot clearly define what is true love and what isn’t, but regardless of the “love” type, there comes side effects along with it. We could see in many cases what Hermia and Lysander’s love has done to the people around them. It has caused grief, betrayal, and a lot more negative connotations. One (of many) scenes where we see this is when Hermia and Helena were talking, and we learn about the friendship they had previous to when this story takes place. It is sad to see how a friendship, like theirs, could go down the drain so quickly and have both parties turn against themselves for those they love.
I want to focus my paper on how Shakespeare clearly depicts the outcome of love. Not every love story occurs like this one, but I like the idea of how Shakespeare is showing us a case of love where not only do the two want to be together, but the people around them don’t want them being together. He shows the depths they are willing to take to be together, and that is the side effects of love. They’re willing to take on those side effects for a happy ending. My plan is to focus on the different falls that occurred when Hermia and Lysander fall in love.
-
What an unromantic essay you seem to be writing! Look at all the negative effects love has on the people around you!
I’m kidding, but it’s also something to think about. Are you suggesting that the whole purpose of the play is make love look bad? Or is it more complicated? Maybe the point is that love makes us act foolish, but that’s okay (just like the amateur actors, as long as the intent is good, isn’t that okay?). Maybe it’s even a warning to parents that their children won’t be able to stop themselves and so parents should be more accepting (no one wants a Pyramus and Thisbe situation).
In this post (#1676, above ), we were discussing how romantic relationships often change non-romantic ones.
Remember to keep in mind your motive: what is the message of the play and why is it important for us today? If lovers will do anything for love, what does that mean for us today?
-
-
Playing off the idea of what dreams mean in this play, I would like to relate that facet to destiny and free will, or rather lack thereof. As much of the plot is escalated after characters fall asleep, perceptions regarding reality are questioned. If everyone in the play feels like the events that have transpired were a dream, does that make it so? Do the decisions of mortals even matter if we have supernatural influence via Oberon and Puck? I would argue they do not, as the outcome of the play, 3 couples getting married, would not have happened if the fairies had not meddled. We have the will of Demetrius and Egeus being completely disregarded by the play’s conclusion, and the plot device of the flower made Lysander, Demetrius, and Titania utterly powerless in its wake. Even Hipployta is not privy to choice. She’s marrying Thesus because she lost to him in battle! Whether or not these characters are destined to end up in their respective places at the end of the play is a question I would like to explore.
-
It sounds a bit like you might have two themes, dreams and free choice.
Take a look up at the conversation that begins with Post #1667 and my response. Katelyn is writing about similar issues and so that conversation will likely be helpful, especially with regard to framing it purely through the idea of destiny and free will (reality may be much more complicated).
I think there’s a serious question, too. In Greek and Roman mythology, cupid’s arrow works. As I wrote above (#1668), Cupid’s name in Greek is “Eros,” so he represents sexual love (or heterosexual love). This is in opposition to “philia” or friendship (sometimes mistakenly called “platonic love”). You might think of it almost as erotic love vs. companionship. Cupid is able to produce instantaneous, strong, passionate love. Cupid can’t spark friendship–that takes time.
You imply that Demetrius has been manipulated, but maybe that manipulation isn’t much different than the natural stuff of attraction. Why am I attracted to one person versus another? Who knows? Does that mean I don’t have free will? I’m not sure I’m willing to go that far.
Maybe another way to think of this is to ask if Cupid’s arrow (and the flower) is symbolic or real. Does it represent lust (in this case common to the young lovers)? If it does, then it interferes with the idea of free-will. If it’s not symbolic but truly is a magical substance that removes all previous thoughts, I guess it might be manipulative.
As to dreams: At the beginning of the banquet scene (Act V), Hippolyta remarks to Theseus that it’s strange that all four lovers have the same story, implying that Theseus doesn’t believe them. Theseus tells her that lovers are crazy and he doesn’t believe in stories about fairies and ancient heroes. It’s a particularly paradoxical moment. Theseus himself is an ancient hero. We’ve also seen the fairies and so his disbelief runs opposite our own experience (and the shared experience of the young lovers). So the fairies are real (for us) but not real (because it’s all in a play). In the play they’re real for the lovers but not for Theseus, although the lovers also end up the way they once were (before the play, when Demetrius still was betrothed to Helina). Maybe they were dreaming… but if they did, why would they all have the same story?
This is all to suggest that this is a complicated topic, so it’ll take some careful thought and deliberate organization.
You also might want to look at the resource I posted on dreams and illusion (it’s different than the direction you’re going, but deals with the theme. It might make you think differently about it).
-
-
The theme that I would like to explore for my essay is the theme of appearances/transformation of reality. Specifically, I want to write about the contrast between transformations of reality experienced by the individual versus by the collective. Does experiencing a transformation of reality as an individual (dreaming) delegitimize the experience any more than experiencing it as a collective (watching a play)? Who gets the final say on what is “real” or not?
I want to explore this theme through the use of two settings: one, the woods, and two, Theseus’ palace. The woods is where all the dreaming and fantasy takes place, and each character has their own individual experience with sleeping and dreaming. Titania specifically wakes up in the woods and speaks about how the recent events of the night before seem dreamlike to her. The four young lovers do the same. The woods are dark, mysterious, and vast, and the huge mileage allows each character involved in the magic of the night before to have their own story- each has to decide whether what they experienced was real or not, because they did not all have the same experience. ( I have not decided which scene I want to use particularly for this part yet )
Then there is Theseus’ palace. In the last act, all of the characters experience a transformation of reality yet again- the play within the play. Collectively, they sit together in Theseus’ concrete, man-made palace and watch reality altered; however, since they are all watching the same thing together at the same time, they do not question it and take this alteration of reality for granted (since plays are an accepted alteration of reality). The night before, however, was a very similar alteration of reality, but since they all experienced it separately they did not laugh or take what happened for granted.
We only accept the alteration of reality when it is organized and placed before us, and when we experience it along with others. When we experience an alteration of reality individually, we wave it off and rationalize it as a dream or as nonsense.
I have not narrowed down exactly what I want to do yet, but this is my idea. I also want to explore the woods versus Theseus’ palace settings more and see how they coincide with the different transformations of reality that happen within them.-
This sounds like a fascinating topic and you’ve got me hooked. In my response to Ricky’s post (the one just above yours), I mentioned the part in Act V when Hippolyta tests Theseus’ disbelief in “fairy stories” by reminding him that all four lovers told the same story: how can four people dream the same dream? It seems even more important
Your ideas also remind me of something I had been reading about a famous production of MND from the 1970s. It was quite controversial because it departed radically from traditional productions. You can see a quick clip here with what might be an interesting comment from the director, Peter Brook: In Shakespeare’s time, lights weren’t used so productions took place in the daytime. The challenge of staging, then, was to make a daytime world seem like night. That’s a real trick of imagination (and may be similar to the idea of collective dreaming you’re thinking about), but easy to do in a dark room with lights or in a movie. In Brook’s version, he does the opposite, making everyone perform in a white box (it’s odd!).
Lastly, I wonder if you’re also thinking about this in terms of how actors “lose” themselves in a role. Do the amateur actors at the end transform into characters? Do the actual actors we’re watching transform (are they part of our dream? or are their characters their own kind of dream)? If you do think in this direction, the fact that Puck speaks to the audience seems particularly important. It’s breaking the fourth wall, the character Puck acknowledges that we’re watching and have been there all along. In that moment does Puck acknowledge us as an actor or as a figment in our dream? Is it different than the dream in which Puck has been running around on stage?
It’s a lot to tackle! But again, I’m excited to read it!
-
-
The theme that I would like to write about for my essay is how true love in the story can bring out the worst in people, and the obstacles that were overcame for this “true love”. After the incident with the love juice, Demetrius realizes that he truly loved Helena, and not Hermia, but he was fixated with Hermia until the end, when Lysander was freed from the trance while Demetrius was still in it. Also maybe I can touch on the mischevious nature of Puck, since he was the ringmaster of this “circus”. The scene in the woods happened because Lysander was wrongfully given the love juice by Puck, which causes him to fall in love with Helena. Another instance is when Titania, who was in love with the boy and refused to give him up, which caused Oberon to become jealous and to come up with a plan with Puck which involved the flower with the love juice. Puck, mischeviously played a prank on Bottom by turning his head into a donkey, turn him into a literal “headass”. Finally, Pucks address to the audience may have been the ringmasters way of saying “Did you all enjoy the show?” and “if not just forget about it like it was a dream”. Overall the idea of Puck pulling all the strings on the play and overall the outcome of the play, also has something to do with the obstacles that true lovers have to face is what I plan on doing for the essay
-
There’s a number of others who are writing similar topics, so you should take a look at those conversations, too.
Remember that you have to define “true love.” You don’t in this paragraph. You also, like others above, seem to take only the negative aspects of love without any positive. But I’m not sure why you do this. Where’s the motive–the explanation for why this is something that would be important for understanding the play. Are you suggesting that Shakespeare wrote MND to convince us “true love” is bad? If so, what should we be striving for? Fake love?
Kidding aside, this is why some more specificity is needed.
I’m aware of essays out on the internet that deal with this subject and I just want to offer a little warning–I’ve read them and I don’t think they’re well argued. As I wrote in the assignment, there’s an awful lot of material out there on Shakespeare and it’s not always of good quality.
-
-
For my essay, I would like to take a look at the theme of perception of social standings in society, and how that is reflected through the characters in the play. More specifically, I want to look at this theme of society and social stratification through how Shakespeare portrays the two different classes of humans in MND. Bottom, Quince, and his crew act differently, talk about different topics, and deal with things like love (in Bottom’s case) and friendship in a much different manner when compared to how Lysander, Demetrius, Helena, and Hermia deal with love and friendship. Similarly, the upper class of Theseus and Hippolyta also have different reactions with love. I think this could be representative of how Shakespeare thinks about different levels of society, and how the people in those levels of society think. I think it would be nice to compare the words that the three groups (or two if we lump Theseus in with Lysander’s group), like how Bottom and the gang confuse words, or appear less smart. Lysander’s group of people speak more eloquently, and even in arguments appear to uphold a certain amount of class with words, as they use witty statements to insult each other. It’s also interesting to look at the comparison between freedom to love whomever one chooses with regards to social standings. Also, the two social groups deal with different daily events during the play. Never do we see Demetrius or Lysander work for money or to live, yet Bottom and the crew are rehearsing this play in hopes of getting recognition and money. Perhaps there is something to be said about this privilege–maybe the elites only have time for live and meaningless quarrels about who lives who, while the commoners can’t afford to waste time on such events when they must worry about the daily chores and struggles of life.
-
Hajar (post #1663) is also writing about this. So you should look above at that conversation, too.
It sounds like you’re moving in a good direction but need to start focusing on the details. Sure the different classes have different experiences/views of love, but what are those different views and experiences (that is, be specific)?
Also think about the larger position this play takes with regard to social stratification. Does the play defend stratification, implying that the mechanicals belong in the lower classes because because they are less smart? Are the mechanicals equal to the aristocratic lovers even though the mix up words because they prove to show artistic skill in the end? Or is the show such a disaster it shows, again, they can only be trusted with basic mechanical tasks. Is it the job of aristocrats to shout out insults at those that are lower than them (that’s what they do), or is this shown to be uncharitable? Or is it all in good fun?
Bottom is raised up to the height of luxury with Titania. Is that all to make fun of him or does he truly receive an incredible dream?
It’s a good observation that social class is vividly presented in the play, but the next question should be why was that important to Shakespeare to show? Or what does this observation tell us about how we should read the play? Is social stratification good or bad? If it’s bad and this play supports it, is this a bad play? — These are the moral questions the Eagleton writes about in his discussion of poetry.
-
-
For this essay I would like to write about how “love” works throughout the play. I want to write that lysander and demetrius seem to be confused on what they want or who they love. At first lysander claims to be wanting to be hermia but, later on states he wants to be helena because he loves her. From this play I can see that love is a confusion and we really can not tell if its true love or not.
-
If this was a more detailed response there’s probably more I could respond to. Love is too broad — what perspective on love does the play take? Do you have thoughts about any of the other characters? Couples? How about the mechanicals? The fairies? There’s a of possible directions.
With only a week to go to write a rough draft, I would be concerned if this is as far as you’ve gone thinking about it.
-
-
For my topic I chose my theme to be is love is blind. When a persons love for someone is blind it usually means no matter the flaw or the negatives that a person has, they will refuse it no matter what for they are too much in love. In the Midsummer Nights Dream, we see an example of love being blind when it comes to the relationships that Shakespeare presented to us with Helena and Demetrius also Hermia and Lysander. If you noticed in the case of Helena and Demetrius, Helena would no stop speak on Demetrius being highly attractive and keep in mind this was the time when Demetrius was in love with Hermia. Demetrius always treated Helena poorly, always trying to avoid her but she wouldn’t stop, in fact, it would make her want him even more. At points Helena would complain about her looks, thinking she isn’t beautiful enough as Hermia to get a man like Demetrius. That is a clear sign of someone who just too in love with a man’s facial appearance to realize what the type of person Demetrius is. Same implies for Hermia and Lysanders case, Lysander always spoke about Hermia’s beauty and elegance, but in the end, he leaves her for Helena, speaking in a harsh tongue towards Hermia. They made it seem that they were such a good couple and they were made for each other but in the end, you see the real truth in a person or the true colors I would say. The situation that these characters faced in the play are somewhat relatable to what I’ve seen when I was in high school, I’ve seen really good couples from being happy to hating each other in the matter of time and ruining great friendships, which also makes me realize that the characters are young as well. I feel when we are in our teens, we tend to get carried away with someone we lust for, we think about the future and many things you can accomplish with your specific other, we think we’re in love till something slips and you get to see the true side of one’s personalities, but its the process of life. I believe that every person had a situation similar to what Shakespeare represented through Hermia, Helena, Lysander, and Demetrius. Well maybe not everyone, but I can see something like that happening in real life. Also, I believe that men during that time didn’t really care about a woman’s interest, it was more of the beauty that mattered. What I believe and I may be wrong, is that men were more into losing a women’s virginity then actually caring about there personalities but in Lysnaders case, he would have to marry in order for intercourse but now in our generations, things have changed, there are couples everywhere having intercourse every day without no consent to marriage. Not saying that I’m that type of person, but there are guys like that and girls should be more careful of men like that, not to be blinded by love.
-
Your making some interesting connections here.
Helena argues that love is blind, possibly as a way to justify the fact that Demetrius doesn’t love her at the start of the play (why else wouldn’t he love fair Helena?) but also possibly to explain why she like Demetrius.
I think a question you might want to ask yourself is if the other characters feel the same way. Do Demetrius and Lysander believe themselves to be blind? If anything, they don’t seem bothered by the fact that they couldn’t see Helen’s beauty before–they think they’ve discovered something new. Are we to believe that they truly don’t see anything good in Helena (that makes me feel bad for her!). Does Hermia believe she’s just blindly in love or does she feel that she has come by it honestly? Does Egeus think love is blind?
Is Bottom’s love blind (does he even love, or just enjoy the luxury)?
If Helena’s explanation is (perhaps) one of many reasons for the way love works, you may have to explain why you’ve chosen that particular one as important to the play (as part of establishing a motive).
-
-
For this essay I would like to focus on the presence of “true love”, or lack thereof, in MND. All of the couples in the show — Theseus and Hippolyta, Lysander and Hermia, Demetrius and Helena, Oberon and Titania — all have serious problems that creates an emotional environment in which “true love” cannot be fostered.
Hippolyta is essentially a political prisoner, given that after she and her Amazons lost the battle against Theseus and his men, Hippolyta was forced to leave her homeland and travel to Athens to marry him. Thus there’s really no chance for it to be a consensual relationship, let alone a happy one. Not to mention, Theseus doesn’t even seem to believe in love that much, as he equates a lover to a madman in the play (5.1.4-6), a belief that most likely wouldn’t belong to someone who was in love themselves.
Oberon and Titania have an awful dynamic. When Oberon wants the Indian prince to join his court, he decides that instead of attempting to have a civil conversation or propose a compromise, he’s going to trick Titania into falling in love with a beast. Not only is this incredibly insensitive, given that he decides to do this even after Titania explains her deep emotional connection to the boy and his mother, but this action is also meant to convey a message of power to Titania. He is attempting to show her, by essentially cuckolding himself, that he is in control of this relationship. That he can do whatever he wants to her, whenever he wants, and she can’t do anything to stop it.
Demetrius and Helena have rather obvious problems. In the first half of the play, Demetrius seems to hate Helena with a passion, only having eyes for Hermia despite being with Helena not that long before. He insults her numerous times, even threatening to “do thee mischief in the wood” (2.1.237), and his cruelty only stops when Oberon gives him the poppies. Given that this is the reason that Helena and Demetrius get married at the end of the play, their relationship is not one of true love because Demetrius doesn’t truly love Helena, he just loves her because the poppies are telling him he does. Also, if one were to bring up the argument that everything in the woods — the poppies, the fighting — could very well be a dream, thus Demetrius did just magically fall back in love with Helena, it still wouldn’t be a relationship founded on “true love”. This is because Demetrius was still in love with Hermia before he fell asleep, and now all of a sudden he’s in love with Helena again. Someone so mercurial when it comes to love cannot be faithful to someone to the point that it could be considered “true love”.
Hermia and Lysander are the only couple that seem to be together for the right reasons, but I don’t believe that their relationship is “true” either. This is because Hermia and Lysander don’t even really understand what true love is. Lysander introduces his definition of “true love”, which Hermia agrees with, by saying “for aught that I could ever read, could ever hear by tale or history” (1.1.132-3). This essentially means that he is taking this definition, which is essentially that all true lovers experience turmoil when attempting to be together (1.1.134), from stories that he’s heard and read. Thus, he’s most likely never been in a serious relationship before, as this is all he has to go off of. Also, given that Hermia agrees with this definition, she’s most likely never been in a serious relationship before either. Therefore, there’s very little way to tell if either of them are experiencing “true love”, because they are too inexperienced to know that for themselves. Additionally, the cruelty that Lysander displays towards Hermia during the fight in the woods is interesting. Lysander makes it clear that he now hates her, even going as far as to lob racial slurs at her — some may attribute this behavior to the poppies, but it is hard to believe that falling for someone else would be cause for being so cruel to someone else. This brings Lysander’s true character into question, and whether he and Hermia will be happy in the future.
-
Sounds like you have a detailed thesis and you’re able to point to how the theme of love is working in each of these relationships.
I’m thinking about what the implications of your argument are. Your argument is that in Shakespeare’s play there is no such thing as “true love,” and this “true love” seems to have certain characteristics:
- True lovers never have any problems or fight
- True lovers “get together for the right reasons”
Both of those seem like unrealistic goals–what relationship has never been tempestuous? This begs the question, is there such thing as a “perfect love,” if not… why do we still call this non-existent model “true love.” Maybe “true” (as in real love) is this messy kind of love in which two people constantly try to live with each other. Sometimes it’s a fight, sometimes one side wins and the other gives in, but there may also be joy and passion, too. All of these can mix in different combinations at different times.
I guess maybe I’m suggesting that your analysis of the relationships in MND seems complex enough that I don’t see why you need to have a rather simple (possibly unattainable) definition of love.
-
Similar to Julia, I would like to write about the lack of true love. I believe true love is the act of unconditionally loving and being with one no matter what the circumstances are. In MND, every relationship had a challenge. Hermia and Lysander challenge was Egeus and the potion, Helena and Demetrius challenge was the lack of mutual feelings, Oberon and Titania was the Indian boy, Pyramus and Thisbe was the wall, Theseus and Hippolyta was that it was forced. With this being said, I would like to somewhat narrow down the essay to the relationships between Hermia and Lysander and Oberon and Titania. This is because I feel like their challenges were more sensible to overcome. In MND, it is said that “the course of true love never did run smooth”, with that being said it makes sense that each one of the listed relationships above had a challenge. Each challenge was meant to test how true each relationships love was. In each relationships case, they all failed the challenge. Lysander was unable to overcome the power of the potion and did not truly love Hermia, Demetrius hated Helena until he was possessed by the potion (not true love), Oberon became angered at Titania and used the potion on her to lure the boy away and get her to love him again (not true love).
-
You should definitely look at what I wrote above, since you’re thinking about this topic similarly.
You write that true love is “unconditional love”–does that include loving people in spite of their faults? Is love all that unconditional if people are always perfect (the love would never be tested). For example do Oberon and Titania show that they are unconditionally in love when they stay together at the end, happy again? Does Titania show some unconditional love by finally giving in to Oberon–because it means so much to him? Or, because they simply have different desires, is any compromise always not a loving one?
Like with Julia above, I think you can think about this a bit more from a realistic standpoint. Shakespeare likely wants us to think about our own, real-world relationships in response to this play, so we don’t only have to think of this in fairy tale terms.
-
-
Similar to Julia, I want to write about the absence of “True Love” between the couples throughout the play. First off I would define what I think “True love” is. Then I would focus on the certain circumstances/ problems that each couple faced that would render them unfit for “True love”. For Theseus and Hippolyta, the fact that Hippolyta is held captive and is forced to marry Theseus clearly depicts that don’t have true love. In regards to Demetrius and Helena, although Demetrius ends up falling in love with Helena in the end of the play, to me this isn’t considered true love because he blinded by the potions effects. Moreover, Oberon and Titania fight over the Indian boy and suspect each other of cheating. In my opinion, True love can have disagreements but can never assume the other partner of cheating. Finally, Lysander and Hermia may impose a difficult argument for me to prove their relationship doesn’t foster “True love”. I still need to put those pieces together.
-
Take a look at the other posts on this topic above. Some of it may prove helpful.
When you’re in the text, you have to be careful about what is interpretation and what is actually there. So we don’t know that Hippolyta is forced to marry Theseus. She doesn’t say that directly–you can infer it from some of what she says. Until about 40 years ago, most people assumed she was getting married willingly and happily. Your version of Hippolyta is determined by how you read the text, but you can’t state as fact things that aren’t in the text.
Do you mean that “true lovers” don’t cheat, or they don’t assume the other is cheating (leaving it open that they might). In other words, does it matter that Theseus and Titania may be cheating on each other or does it matter that they suspect it of each other? I think most people would care more about the act, but there is something important about the lack of trust.
We of course don’t know exactly what fairy political relationships look like. Who knows, maybe fairies don’t expect exclusivity in their relationships?
-
-
-
<span style=”font-weight: 400;”>The theme that I want to focus on in my essay is how the idea of love changes as we grow up. Does it really change or is there an element about it that remains the same throughout our lives? In order to discuss this theme in MND, I will use examples from the play of how children–more specifically little boys–think of love, how teenagers deal with love, and how adults learn to love. Helena says that “Love looks not with the eyes but with the mind…And therefore is Love said to be a child, Because in choice he is so oft beguil’d. As waggish boys in game themselves forswear, So the boy Love is perjur’d every where”(Act I:1:234-241). She is partially claiming that the way that children are introduced to the idea of love is gradual–meaning not everything about it such as sexual intercourse is immediately presented. As Emily Dickinson would say, “The Truth must dazzle gradually Or every man be blind–.” Since little kids do not know the whole truth (which they will eventually learn as they grow older), they can be easily fooled and will not know how to think rationally when it comes to making choices–both simple and complex ones. However, once that transition from kid to teenager occurs, they develop a greater sense of self-awareness as well as an increase of hormones. This premature stage can also cause teenagers to act like kids when it comes to love. What I mean is that many teenagers desire someone physically attractive just as kids might want something that looks appealing to the eye. However, this attraction is only temporary until they find the next best thing or someone who is better looking. For example, Demetrius first went with Helena, but after seeing Hermia, he leaves Helena and pursues Hermia. I can compare this with how kids might want a toy when it first comes out in stores and think that they are going to play with the same toy forever, but when a new toy is released then they are going to want the new toy to play with. Similarly, teenagers might go out and date each other, but when someone who is more attractive comes along then they might cheat on or break up with each other. I believe that a part of this teenage love carries on into adulthood and plays out in many marriages. People cheat on their spouse all the time and it comes from this same desire that every single one of them had when they were a kid–this desire for “eye candy” which has developed into lust and sexual desire. This can be supported by the love parallels of Theseus and Hippolyta and Oberon and Titania. Each pair cheats on their significant other with one from the other pair. Adults might think that marriage means finding your soulmate for life, but they still go out and cheat on each other all the time. From childhood, our eyes have deceived us into wanting things for their exterior appearance. However, as we grow older some of us start to realize that love is about more than just looks, but rather about a much deeper emotional connection to other people. </span>
-
Make sure you pay attention to the periods in that passage, and also be careful by the word “as” which indicates a comparison.
Helena says, for example, that love is represented as a child because children are often overwhelmed by choice. If you tell a child to pick one prize or another, she’ll want both. That means that choice is beguiling (confusing) for them.
You’re making a grand narrative in which you’re taking different people and putting them together into one theory of how love changes. This is Helena’s argument though–do you have reason to think it’s Shakespeare’s opinion? Other folks are in the play, like Hermia and Lysander, likely have a different opinion. Why should we believe Helena’s opinion more than anyone else? Do you have reason to believe that Shakespeare wants us to care about this opinion more than the others?
There’s a way to get around this, of course. You might suggest that Shakespeare uses the different characters to show us how love appears to different people. Why? That’s up to you. Maybe he wants to undermine the idea of there being one, singular idea of love? Maybe all of these people do love in their own way.
In the next sentence you have a different comparison: in the same way that mischievous boys play (probably getting in trouble, probably boasting, practical jokes etc.) so too do people often lie about love. To me this implies that the seriousness with which we court someone is often untrue to some degree. Maybe this is why people fret over whether or not they’ve said “I love you” yet in a relationship–they’re not actually worried about whether or not they do LOVE someone (if they did, they’d just say it!) but rather they use this phrase to act as a form of commitment. Maybe those aren’t the same.
Maybe, too, people often do things in the NAME of love that aren’t very loving.
-
-
In my essay I would like to explore the interplay between gender and power as seen in the play a Midsummer’s Night’s Dream. The female characters in MND often begin as seeming in control of their relationships (Hermia being the one who chooses to love Lysander, Helena chasing Demetrius, Titania spurning Oberon). However, as the play progresses the female characters somehow lose this power and become under the control of their male counterparts. I would like to explore the similarities between these female characters, their relationship, and the way the power dynamics shift throughout the play. All three of these characters in the end have their choices places on them by men, and despite the fact that they do love the men they marry, there is a stark contrast between the beginning of the play, in which the female characters have autonomy, and the end, in which all of the women are essentially manipulated into loving their partners. It is significant to me that the main controller of these relationships are male figures, most especially as Theseus, Egeus, and Oberon. I would like the explore the similarities between the male counterparts who control the women in the play and understand the relationship seen between power and gender through the interpretation of the play.
-
I also want to write my essay about the relationship between the women in the play and their positions of power. I hadn’t noticed the switch from women carrying the power in their relationships with the men in the story to losing it by the end until you pointed it out, and I think it’s really interesting. I want to focus on how the women asserting their power results in them losing the upper hand they are attempting to raise. For example, Hermia refusing to marry Demetrius results in Theseus forcing her to the life of a nun or death, or Titania refusing to give the child to Oberon resulting in her being bewitched into love with Donkey-Bottom.
Is the loss of power of the women a direct result of them refusing to comply to their male counterparts? Why is this a repeated them in every relationship in the story? What was Shakespeare trying to show about love in this play, or love in general? All of these are questions I intend to explore in my essay.
-
This is a fascinating take on this topic and it sounds promising. It also sounds like you both have some good specific examples to write about.
On the Resources page, I’ve posted a scholarly article about Gender and Sexuality. It includes some close readings of the play that might be really helpful helpful for you. It’s not focused exactly on power per se, but on the complex reasons why Hermia, Helena, Hippolyta and Titania might accept their (unequal) roles.
Another part you might want to think about (mentioned in the above article) is Queens Elizabeth, alluded to in Oberon’s narrative about where the flower got its power. Queens Elizabeth offers a counterpoint to the action in the play (maybe).
-
-
In my essay I would like to explore the combination of loyalty and betrayal that is inherent to Helena and Hermia’s relationship. Perhaps my interpretation is flawed, but the friendship between the two women at many points seems to be older and more complex than many of the romances in the play. Helena and Hermia take turns directing anger, sentimentality, jealousy, and love towards each other. It is fascinating to see their positions switch abruptly, and to observe the similarities and differences between how each handles the situation that their friend had been in only a moment before. It seems that one’s happiness comes at the expense of the other’s even though they want different things (or men). I think the scene in which Lysander and Demetrius suddenly fall in love with Helena would be important to analyze here. I would also like to contrast the nature of Lysander and Demetrius’s relationship to that of Helena and Hermia. The two men seem to only be capable of rivalry, but there is a strange underlying loyalty underneath Helena and Hermia’s competitiveness. Essentially, I would like to explore the intricacies of this iconic female friendship against the backdrop of contrasting relationships in the play.
-
I’ve seen some essays on the internet about this topic and I’ve mostly been underwhelmed by them. Binaries are easy to set up but are often not very realistic. I’m not sure that all of my decisions can be classified as loyal or betrayal. If Helena tells of Hermia’s escape, why is that a betrayal? Did they tell her not to tell? Helena didn’t notify the adults (maybe she thought Demetrius might?).
It doesn’t really look like you’re thinking about this through the lens of loyalty and betrayal though, but through the more complex lens of how competition in hetrerosexual relationships often challenges healthy and sustaining homosocial relationships (homo-social meaning “same” but in social situations, not sexual ones… like single-sex locker rooms where guys talk about girls or vice versa).
Your observation that Lysander and Demetrius become rivals fits this pattern. When Demetrius loved Helena, none of this was a problem. In the competition, Demetrius fights with Lysander even though the person who should make the decision is Hermia (why would Demetrius fight Lysander?). As you point out, Helena and Hermia fight. But Hermia also fights with her father and of course Helena may have had a friendly relationship with Lysander, but that’s on the rocks when she thinks everyone’s ganged up on her.
You might benefit from reading the Gender and Sexuality article I’ve posted in Resources.
You may also want to read this blog post about how Shakespeare portrays friendships.
-
-
For my essay, I would like the focus on the pairs of Lysander and Demetrius with Hermia and Helena and how they are interchangeable due to their similarities in the events of MND. Demetrius ended up cheating on Helena to court Hermia in Act 1, Scene 1, and Lysander also cheats on Hermia for Helena, even if it was from the magic flower’s effects. When both men seek to obtain the love of the two women they go after, they also point out each other’s faults. For example, Lysander says how Demetrius “made love to Nedar’s daughter, Helena, And won her soul” (1.1.107-108). In comparison, Demetrius comments on how Lysander’s love to Helena is false when he states “Disparage not the faith thou dost not know, Lest, to thy peril, thou aby it dear” (3.2.174-175). Moreover, just like how Demetrius hurls abuse at Helena in the forest as she chases him since he doesn’t want her love in Act 2, Scene 2, Lysander carries out similar actions when he insults Hermia by calling her an Ethiop along with other insults as he doesn’t want her love anymore since he thinks that he loves Helena instead. As the actions of Lysander and Demetrius have many similarities and often overlap, I think that their characters can interchange.
As for Hermia and Helena, there is a resemblance between the two as their lovers end up cheating on them. Hermia’s lover, Lysander, cheated on her for Helena and Helena’s lover, Demetrius, cheated on her for Hermia, yet the two couples were able to get back together by the end of the play. Additionally, Helena describes her sense of inferiority and beauty to Hermia since she has a lighter hair color than Hermia which she thinks Demetrius has chosen Hermia for. Meanwhile, Hermia has a height complex as she compares her short height to Helena’s and feels mocked when she is constantly called low, little, and dwarf. With their common complexes on their physical traits and circumstances of lovers cheating on them, Hermia and Helena overlap and seem like interchangeable characters to me. As such, I would like to compare the pairing and interchangeability of the four characters through the play in my essay.
-
I think you need to be careful about the word “cheat.” Do you know Demetrius cheats on Helena? Or, do they simply break up? Do we even know (if we don’t, maybe it doesn’t matter to Shakespeare). The same is true in the woods when Lysander falls under the spell of the flower. You don’t think Demetrius “cheats” on Hermia even though he also changes his mind.
More generally, it sounds like you have a clear thesis and specific details. That’s good.
What I think you’re missing is the “so what” part of your essay. What’s the motivation for this argument? Why should I care that the young lovers are interchangeable? What’s the deeper meaning behind that? Is Shakespeare saying young lovers are all interchangeable and while young people take love seriously, it’s all just crazy chance? Or is it something about how common these stories are? This is a crucial element of a successful essay.
-
-
For this first essay, I would like to write about the theme of, “love is a powerful emotion, and is therefore very dangerous to play with”. In other words, love can drive people to behave in multiple ways either happy, sad, or aggressively, and that playing with someones emotions can lead to harsh or irrational behavior. For example, in the play A Midsummer Nights Dream, Helena is madly in love with Demetrius, so she follows him everywhere as they bump into each other in the woods. Even though Demetrius threatened Helena, she didn’t care because she really do love Demetrius. In addition, when Lysander was accidentally given a drop of the love potion from the flower, Hermia still expressed her love towards Lysander even though he was insulting her. Hermia was also ready to fight Helena, even though they were friends since childhood. Another example, when Lysander and Hermia ran away from home for them to live peacefully together. When they decided to run away, they didn’t really think through a proper detailed plan to run away. What if something bad happens? What if they send the law after them and got captured? Lysander and Hermia were so in love that they only thought about being together and therefore, didn’t devise much of a safe plan to successfully run away.
This theme can also apply to people today. Since there are still many people around the world today who have found someone that they absolutely love. However, not everything works out for everyone. There will always be those who have their emotions toyed with and in this case, the same situation that Helena was placed in. For example, in this day and age with technology being as big as ever, people can easily express their personalities through messages, but this can also lead to ones emotions being toyed with. One person can seem as if they’re interested in someone, but completely ghost them the next day. This can lead to the person feeling insecure about themselves and most likely cause them to think or behave irrationally. Ultimately, the feeling of love can be complicated, and therefore can make people change their perspective about the world.
-
I think you need to be careful about the word “cheating.” It very specifically means when someone breaks a commitment (usually meaning an exclusive relationship). Breaking up with someone or changing your mind (or even falling out of love with someone) isn’t the same as cheating.
Along the same lines, I’d be careful about “strong emotion” and “dangerous.” All emotions can be strong–(sadness, grief, hatred, friendship, lust, etc.) so what makes love unique? I also wonder what the “danger” is specifically? People do crazy things for love, but is that a problem with love or the way we’re taught to express it? In other words, when Hermia and Lysander escape, in part it’s because they’ve learned that love makes you do bold action. What if they’d been taught something different? Maybe that “love is patient” or “love is kind”… would it still hold the same danger?
I also wonder who is playing with love? Hermia and Lysander love each other… is that playing? It’s Oberon who decides to try to control love, first deciding he’ll fool Titania and then adding Demetrius because he feels bad for Helena. You’ll notice, though, he doesn’t want to make Helena happy (in fact he says she’ll be running from him by the end). But what consequences happen for the fairies? Titania is tricked but does she seem to care? In the end she ends up with Oberon without much resistance.
I think you have all the right elements but maybe try some other configurations. Shakespeare’s stories and plots are often very complicated and resist easy, simple morals.
-
-
I am going to write about how friendships in this play get ruined because of love. For example Helena and Hermia. This not only happens in the play but also in life.
-
Sure. You don’t have much here for me to respond to, so I’ll trust you have plans. You might want to look at the Gender & Sexuality article I mention above (and link to) as well as the Friendship blog post (also linked above, but also on the Resources page).
-
-
The theme I am going to focus on is ” true love”
Outline:
introduction:
This part introduces the background information about the play and the overall focus of the paper which include the aspects being considered in the play.<span class=”Apple-converted-space”> </span>
These include imagery, symbols, allusions, references, indications of tone, hints at stage directions and verse forms.
body:
Based on the key scenes, this section will highlight the theme of true love. Some of the characters of interest are and Lysander and Hermia.<span class=”Apple-converted-space”> </span>
The love relationship between Thesus and Hypolyta will also serve to examine the element of true love.<span class=”Apple-converted-space”> </span>
Focus is made on the complex nature of the relationships are and how this view shapes our understanding of true love.
Key elements of literature such as imagery, symbols, illusions and tones will be used to examine the aspect of true love in the play.
-
I don’t see a lot of specificity here that I can be helpful with. For instance, in your introduction you write that you’ll introduce the background of the play, but that doesn’t give me an idea of what background/context you think is important. You mention key scenes but don’t name them. Keep in mind the elements from the instructions. If you choose “true love” you need to define it and you need a motivation. You need specificity.
-
-
For this paper, I would like to discuss the meaning of true love and how to tell if two people are truly in love with each other. In Shakespeare’s a Midsummers Night Dream, there are so many different types of romantic relationships. Theseus and Hipolyta; one of the first couples the audience is introduced to. They are soon to be married but it does not seem like they are both fully in love with each other. This relationship can show how love can be one sided. Later we are introduced to Hermia and Lysander. They seem to be completely and utterly in love with each other, but then many different factors get into the way. First there is Egeus who does not allow their relationship, but then there is all the magic in the forest that causes problems along the way. Does this mean that true love does not exist if something can disrupt it? Was it ever really disrupted? How do we know if it is true love or not? In addition there is also Oberon and Titania, whom are married but are constantly budding heads. I want to compare these three different couples and their relationships and what makes them so different yet similar. Is it because of hierarchy? The power of men? Magic? I haven’t decided which scene I do want to discuss, but I do find these couples and the differences between them interesting. I also dont think its a coincidence that Shakespeare decided to write about so many different relationships in this play.
-
You’ve got some great questions here and it looks like you’re going in a productive directions.
Something I notice, though: You tell me that you’ll be able to explain who is “truly” in love, but then you don’t give me a definition.
In your first example, you write that it is one sided, implying that this is somehow NOT true love. That’s telling me something about it without defining it… Also why can’t true love be one sided? Can I truly love someone or something that doesn’t love me back? It’s hard to tell because you haven’t offered a definition. Clearly, you seem to think that love is always two-directional (i.e. loving pair). How does your idea square with, say, the idea of good relationships always having a reacher and a setteler?
I offer that link as a challenge to sharpen your idea. It certainly seems like you’re asking all of the right questions… but it’s the answers that you need to have in the essay!
-
-
The topic I would like to cover for my essay is, what does Shakespeare think is true love and its impact on the people who seem to have been influenced by it. this will be directed more towards Lysander, Demetrius, Hermia, and Helena, because of how their relationships spiral out of control. This is Shakespeare play so I will also try to analyze his other works(Romeo and Juliet) and how the relationships/ true love differ in each. In the end, I will try to figure out if it was actually true love in a midsummer night’s dream.
-
“What does Shakespeare think of…” is a question but you need to have the answers in your essay. It’s fine that you’re tackling the question, but without an indication how how you’ll answer it, that’s about all I can say that’s helpful.
The directions are specific though–You’re writing about a single theme (it has to be more specific than “love”) in two scenes in THIS play. We don’t care about anything else Shakespeare has ever written, just how you can closely read this one.
-
-
For the essay I plan to write about the different couples and their definition of “true love” , compare their outcomes or write about how “true love” shows people’s true colors. I do not know how to rephrase that but I want to talk about how Lysander was being extremely rude Hermia but I do not know what theme that portrays.
-
Well I’d say that Lysander isn’t the only mean one. Demetrius clearly doesn’t want what’s good for Hermia, why else would he be okay with marrying her knowing she hates him? I take your point, though, he’s not as openly cruel to Hermia.
But then, Demetrius is cruel to Helena. He threatens to assault her, rape her, abandon her. He reminds Helena that he doesn’t ever speak nice to her (he says “speak thee fair”) and only ever tells her that he doesn’t love her. It sounds not all that different than Lysander’s threats and insults.
How odes Oberon treat Titania? If you can see a pattern, you might have some kind of theme developing–something about how we treat people who love us when it’s unwanted?
-
-
For my essay I want to delve into the “love” that goes on in this essay. In Act 1 scene 1, Hermia and Lysander define what true love is. I want to analyze their definition and see how it plays a role in their relationship throughout the play. At the end of the same scene, Helena describes true love and what it means to her. I want to analyze her description and see if that’s how she portrays herself throughout the play.
I’m also planning on analyzing how love throughout the play changes the characters, oftentimes making them act very different from who they really are. I definitely want to include the love juice that was used and how it changed the way people loved each other.
I’m excited to see what this essay brings and can’t wait to analyze love in a deeper and more powerful way.
-
And how do they define it? Difficult? Fleeting? But also illuminating (literally? symbolically?). It’s smart to use a definition that’s presented in the play because you know Shakespeare would be aware of it.
I’m interested in what you mean by people changing from “who they are.” How are you supposed to know much about these characters? Lysander falls under the spell of the flower in Act II–so you see him “normal” almost never. That’s not a lot of evidence to go on. There are some clues, but I’ve often thought that Lysander stays pretty consistent even if his choice shifts.
You have some interesting ideas and I’m also excited to see how you develop them!
-
-
The topic for my essay that I would like to write about is “true love”. For this essay there is multiple examples that can be used to further explain this entirely. One example being Helena and Lysander and Hermia’s definitions of true love. Then to further explain these ideas of true love that these characters speak about we can use the conflict caused by the love potion to further the idea of true love. This can be explained in how exactly each characters definitons finds truth, with Hermia’s definition there is tragedy when Lysander quickly changes his feelings towards her and for Helena how the love interest changes towards the end of the story.
-
You don’t have much detail here. You’re telling me you’re going to do things but not how. You don’t really have examples. You write that you’ll explain what each couple thinks of true love… but what do they think? This was your opportunity to get feedback about your ideas.
You definitely need to think about motive. Why would someone want to read this essay? Why would a scholar care what the definitions of love are in the play? What’s the deeper message here about love in the play?
-
-
The topic I will like to discuss in my essay is what true love really consists of. For example, I would like to read between the lines shared by Lysander and Hermia to define their love as true or simply an act that their young minds believe is love. The reason I want to look into this topic is because I want to understand why it is that Lysander ends up lashing out at Hermia after placed under a spell. In my opinion true love is suppose to be stronger then any forces on Earth (or so I think), so magic shouldn’t be stronger then the supposed love between Lysander and Hermia. To arrive to a proper conclusion, I also plan on comparing the relationship between Pyramus and Thisbe. The love these two lovers shared is placed under a tragedy but my question is, what causes Pyramus to kill himself rather then walk away from the idea of his beloved Thisbe dead? Was it for true love or to prove something to himself/others? These same questions arise with Lysander and Hermia’s relationship because we aren’t sure why the magic is able to over come the love the lovers supposedly share. The essay can also answer the question of was her father’s claim of Lysander enchanting Hermia’s heart true or is his love for her true.
(My ideas for this essay are jumbled up, all i really know is that i want to prove if Lysanders love for Hermia real or is it all an act to prove something to himself/others. I am aware I can also do this by comparing other relationships such as Hermia and Helena, Helena and Dimetris, or Titania and Obran. However at the moment the one I see more comparison with is Pyramus and Thisbe because both pairs of lovers think their love is so great that no one should stop them from being together so they run away and faced with unexpected events.)
-
I think you’ve picked up on something really interesting from P&T. Pyramus makes a grand gesture by killing himself (someone in class said it seemed “over dramatic). He even suggests it proves him not a coward. When Thisbe finds Pyramus and realizes he committed suicide, she says “But I, too, command/ the force to face at least this task: I can / claim love, and it will give me strength to strike myself.” She continues by imagining what others will say about her: “that I–unfortunate– / was both the cause and comrade of your fate.” So Thisbe see killing herself as a grand gesture, too, and one people will remember.
It sounds to me like you’re pulling apart the idea that a grand gesture is necessary for love. Some might even argue that grand gestures more often than not are selfish. The famous scene in Say Anything where a boy plays music to a girl who no longer wants him might be romantic, but it might also be stalkerish.
If I’m sticking to bad 80s song references, maybe you’re also suggesting that “If you love someone, set them free.”
I think you’re further along than you think and that you’re going in a good direction.
-
-
For the first essay I will be comparing the idea of true love, and how each of the three major relationships define their own values regarding love. In this case the three relationships I will be taking a look at will be Hermia and Lysander’s relationship, Helena and Demetrius, and Hippolyta and Theseus. These relationships have set their own ideas of love, and by comparing each relationship we can gain a better understanding of what true love really is.
-
There’s not much detail here for me to respond to. You’re telling me what you’ll do but not how. Remember to follow the directions, too. You need to follow a theme through two scenes and that means you might not only be able to stick to the young lovers. What about the other relationships we see? Also remember the motive–why is this interesting for other scholars? Why should we care about what definitions the lovers have?
-
-
I would like to focus my paper on the role of voyeurism in A Midsummer Night’s Dream, more specifically, how the act of watching a play or outside observation allows detachment from the “lamentable comedy” of everyday drama. Puck and Oberon watch as the former’s actions ripple through the group of friends. While Oberon later chews Puck out for his carelessness, neither are inclined to do anything (at least immediately), perhaps because the two are slightly amused by “the fools these mortals be.” Watching a play allows for the same experience, as although the perils of young love and betrayal are something we bemoan in real life, we’re able to see how ridiculous it all is and maybe even enjoy it through the lens of the stage. I think there might also be an interesting connection to this idea in Bottom’s over-the-top performance and dramatization of his role. I’m still refining, so please forgive me if this is kind of all over the place.
-
This seems like an interesting direction. You should look up at my conversation with Ricky above (#1690), since he’s writing about similar ideas.
You should also look at the blog post about Illusions and Dreams in MND from the British Library (I posted it in Resources).
It almost sounds like you’re making a comment on the genre of comedy, though. There is a type of detachment that we have with comedies (maybe even art) that allows us to laugh at people when in real life we might feel bad for them (think about when you see a cartoon step on a rake or something). This might have something to do with the fictionality Eagleton discussed in relationship to poetry. Even when a play is about a real event–such as Shakespeare’s history plays–there is a layer of fiction that allows us to feel for the characters from a safe distance. In tragedy we can feel bad for the devastation, but it’s safe because it’s not real. Maybe this is why people like scary movies–they’re safe. So maybe the “safe” part about comedies is that we can outright laugh at people and it’s safe. We can see ourselves in others but with that safe distance of a fictional character, criticism doesn’t feel so bad.
Interesting ideas!
-
-
I would like to discuss the false, superficial love seen throughout MND. I think that Act II Scene i with Oberon and Titania being cruel to one another (admitting infidelity, Oberon later making Titania fall in love with a beast) perfectly exemplifies my argument. Act II scene ii, when Lysander professes his love for Helena by expressing his disdain for Hermia can also support my claim. I am concerned that in order to label this false love, I would have to say “it’s different from true love in x ways,” which would then lead me to having to define true love and possibly exemplify it.
I might extend this to argue that Shakespeare was making a social commentary about how the upper class must accept subpar love in exchange for political/economical gain, and will therefore never know true love. This idea adds to the comical aspect of the play as it is implied that all is right with the world in the end, everyone loves who they are supposed to, but they never experience unconditional love, and they don’t even know that they’re missing out.
-
Your right, your thesis implies there is such a thing as “true” love–otherwise how could the aristocrats have “sub par” love? What’s type of love is just par for the course, though?
You start to define it also through implication. If Oberon and Titania are mistrustful, decietful, unfaithful and you deem their relationship “sub par” then it implies “real” love is trusting, faithful and honest. That all sounds good…
But as you mention, almost no one has that sort of relationship and at times these traits get turned on their head. Lysander, when he’s in love with Helena, is perhaps too honest with Hermia about his scorn. He’s faithful–never being untrue without telling Hermia–and honest.
One way people have gotten around this is to reject this ideal of “true love” for a more pragmatic “true love” (true=real life, rather than “perfect”). Are these “true loves” in that sense? Passionate, fickle, eager, hesitant, lustful, hateful, vengeful, bitter, cruel, forgiving, reconciling?
Maybe the problem is the ideal. Maybe without the ideal Hermia and Lysander wouldn’t have run off. Maybe the boys wouldn’t have been so cruel as a means to prove the purity of their love?
I’ll be interested in how you resolve this tension between wanting to critique the romance and avoid defining a “true love.”
-
-
For my essay, I would like to examine the role that duty plays in A Midsummer Night’s Dream. Many of the characters in AMND are bound by duty; Hermia, for example, is compelled by filial duty to marry the man (Demetrius) whom her father Egeus has picked out for her, while Hippolyta’s duty as the defeated party in her battle with Theseus is to marry him. Even characters without lines in the play have duties; the Indian boy who is the main subject of contention between Oberon and Titania is bound by the obligations of servitude. Puck, being Oberon’s direct subordinate, appears nominally to be similarly obliged, but he appears to exist in more of a gray area, as he is known (whether intentionally or otherwise) to make mischief contrary to Oberon’s wishes. I’d like to analyze not only how the dynamic of duty drives the play’s action, but also the distinction that exists between characters who choose to obey their duty (e.g. Hippolyta and the Indian boy) and those who choose not to obey (e.g. Puck and Hermia), made especially interesting considering that the former receive few, if any, lines, whereas the latter group comprises major players in the play’s action.
-
It looks like you’re going in a well-defined direction.
Some thoughts that might help you’re thinking through all of this.
I think there’s a question as to whether or not the Indian boy comes to Titania as a result of duty. The boy’s mother is worshiper of Titania, but it doesn’t imply that she has a duty to render up her child. Although Titania does say it is for her sake that she cares for the child (is that the same as duty)? Oberon wants the boy to be a servant (that would invoke duty) and of course he invokes duty in requesting the child from Titania.
Puck identifies himself as Oberon’s jester and jesters have a unique role in the court. The jester makes people laugh, but because he is a fool he is often the only one who is allowed to speak “truth to power” and also to make fun of the king (that’s partially his job). So you’re right that Puck lives in a special kind of gray area.
-
-
My topic of research and close reading will be a mixture of the Marriage and Women’s rights.
I want to focus on the roles of the women in highlighting the oppression and acts of rebellion against the legal binding of marriage in Shakespeare’s time. My deep passion and interest in Women’s rights and gender differences will help me in my literary analysis. To narrow my idea I think I will focus on the two characters of Hippolyta and Hermia.
In my past projects on Queen Elizabeth I of England, who was the ruling monarch during Shakespeare’s time, it is important to note that she was called the “Virgin Queen” and did not marry. She therefore did not surrender any of her assets and properties (aka England) to any man during her reign which unfortunately the ladies of this play did not have the same privilege of escaping marriage.
Hippolyta, Queen of the Amazon, after losing her land and army is forced to wed Theseus. The tension between Theseus and Hippolyta are most evident in the first and last scene of the play. In the beginning, Theseus alludes to the fact that although he defeated her and her spirits may be low, he will “wed her in a different key”. In the end, the audience sees again how Hippolyta consistently disagrees with Theseus, while they are watching the performance of Pyramus and Thisbe at their wedding, she says its “the silliest of stuff I ever did hear” while Theseus reassures her that the effort was commendable.
Hermia is too resistant to a marriage but verbalizes her disdain for the Athenian law and mandatory obedience to her father’s will. She wants her own right and freedom to marriage who she will and surrender her “virgin patronage” to whomever she chooses. She is very bold for the times to defy her father and lord then run away into the wood with her lover all to prove a point that she would rebel against the regulations on women to be submissive, obey and marry. These two women were strong rebels, leading on the battlefield or fighting for true love.
-
You have a clear direction and that will serve you very well. I also like that you’re picking up on Elizabeth–Shakespeare even alludes to her (and also emphasizes her virginity).
There’s an interesting tension when you’re looking for resistance to traditional marriage roles in this play–Shakespeare proves often to be a moving target in his support of women. He’s just as likely to show a witty, well-read, politically engaged woman as he is to show that same woman ridiculed, tortured, or married off (I’m looking at you specifically “Taming of the Shrew”). And in fact, this play in particular has often been a flashpoint of for feminist literary theory.
There are some other working on similar topics and I’ve suggested an article on Gender and Sexuality in MND that I’ve posted in resources. The file I’ve posted is just a portion of the larger article, though. If you already have some familiarity with Gender Studies, then you might be interested in the complete article which traces how this play has been read by different Queer and Feminist groups (each tied to different political objectives). It’s almost like a mini-lesson in the changing field of Gender studies. It’s dense, though. Take a look at the portion I posted and if you’re interested in the rest, let me know via email and I’ll send it over.
-
-
I think in my essay I would like to write about the notion of “true love” in the Midsummer Nights Dream. As I was reading the play the question that would constantly pop into my head was, is there actually any true love in this play? I want to compare the characters love in this play, I want to also emphasize on the definition of true love and how each character really carries this out, since they all think they are in love some way. I don’t believe there was actual true love here, it was more forbidden love or jealous love.
-
-
I was thinking about writing about true love, but looking at your replies to other students it doesn’t seem like the best idea. There aren’t many examples of true love in the story at all. Rather there are many examples of fake love. So I’d like to write about love as an illusion. As something that blinds people and covers their senses. That makes people do things that they themselves as well as other people would never see them doing. It creates a shroud over people and takes control over them, and in this story in particular, love causes more problems and strife than happiness. I would like to look at love in a negative light.
-
Your lucky I checked one last time… I had finished grading and was looking forward to a weekend without any more discussions to look at !
My first response to your idea… do you really believe that? Do you think love is an illusion and just tricks us out of our senses? Your that much of a romantic?
It’s fine to write about true love, but you have to define it. You still have to do that if you write about “fake love” because for something to be fake, you need to be able to identify what is real.
I’m not quite sure, really, what you mean by the assertion that all the relationships are fake, anyway. They’re all real relationships in the same way that I know some people who have great relationships and some people who have terrible relationships. I would have a hard time calling any of my friends’ relationships fake. If two people are married, dislike each other, but stay together… is that fake? On what basis should we decide the relationships in the play are “fake”?
Generally I think the problem with the “true love” topic is that it’s simplistic–life often isn’t so simple so I don’t know why we would expect Shakespeare to be so simple.
It might be helpful to narrow your focus. Instead of looking at all the relationships (there are too many for such a short essay), perhaps focus on one that we see change, or two that show a good comparison. It’s easier to find a contrasting pair and perhaps explain why Shakespeare would want to show that contrast than it is to try to group all the
-
-
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
