Skepticism In Arcadia

1055 Words5 Pages

Tom Stoppard’s Arcadia is a play that spends a lot of time debating between scepticism/theory and science. This back and forth game includes Bernard, Hannah, and Valentine, who are each at different points of the spectrum between science and literature. Many critics argue that the constant interruptions in the study room, combined with the state of the table-top as the play progresses creates a sense of cognitive entropy and that it disrupts the reading experience, causing the readers to decay into a sense of madness similar to that of the ‘Sidley Park hermit.’
The two articles I chose discuss the role of skepticism throughout the play, whether it is intentional, and if it a good thing. I originally found three articles: an original by Burkhard …show more content…

Muller-Muth agrees with Niederhoff about the creative purpose of misunderstandings in the play, but says “I part company with Niederhoff when he tries to invalidate sceptical …show more content…

Although the room was designed to be Thomasina’s own, it by no means serves its actual purpose in the play. Then, in the last section, titled “Return to Scepticism(?),” Muller-Muth returns to the original question which caused her to write this article: “Whether Arcadia professes a sceptical attitude towards the pursuit of knowledge or not”(286). She cites several textual examples of unknowns that are left without answers (such as who shot the hare) and the existential comment by Hannah, “It’s wanting to know that makes us matter”(2.7). In closing, Anja Muller-Muth does not try to prove or disprove scepticism in Tom Stoppard’s play, but makes about the overall process of seeking knowledge; the process is much more important than the final answer, even if you don’t ever find it. As Hannah said, sometimes it can be “better to struggle on knowing that failure is final”(2.7).
The second article I chose is “Who Shot the Hare in Stoppard’s Arcadia?” by Burkhard Niederhoff it is a response to Anja Muller-Muth, and therefore gained its title from Muller-Muth’s point that several that are left unknown in the play (including who killed the hare). Niederhoff claims that “the question why Byron left England is hardly more relevant

Open Document