Much Ado About Lear (An Analysis of Comedy and Tragedy Through the Works of Shakespeare) Enter any theatre, and there is a very high probability you will encounter two masks. One will depict a joyful expression, and one will depict a mournful one. These represent the two types of shows that there are: dramas and comedies. While on the surface these may seem complete opposites, in truth they also have many similarities. “Shakespeare 's plays are all about one great general theme: disorder” (Johnston).
Shakespeare has a special way of handling the plots in order to keep the audience guessing. This is one of the main reasons why he still manages to surprise us even today in ways that probably the Greeks and the French never have. Aristotle defines comedy as “an imitation of men that are worse than the average” Since we are dealing with normal people and the problems they might have, we cannot expect a perfect outcome for everybody in all aspects at the end of a play. If life was perfect we will probably not have a need for comedies. These situations and characters are there to helps us appreciate what is really happening in the
William Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet and Arthur Laurent’s West Side Story were both tragic, romantic, works. West Side Story was a close variation of the play Romeo and Juliet, but the author of West Side Story changed characteristics of Tony to differ from his Romeo and Juliet equivalent, Romeo. Tony became more of an introverted, optimistic, and innocent character. On the other hand, Romeo was outgoing, seemingly bipolar, and violent. These changes in character between Tony and Romeo altered the themes from societal expectations, fate over free will, and complicated families to societal expectations in the 1950’s, inevitability of fate, and gang rivalry due to racism.
This essay is written about the differences of Brutus and Cassius in the play Julius Caesar. Julius Caesar was written by William Shakespeare. It has a lot of characters in it that will switch up on people that they are close to. Brutus and Cassius have many similarities in this play. A couple of them are that they both want to get rid of Caesar, they are both respected greatly, and they had a role in Caesar’s death.
Aime Cesaire’s reimagining of The Tempest by William Shakespeare serves to challenge the original version by making changes to the ending scene so that we can see the harsh reality that occurs when empire and resistance clash with one another by making changes to characters like Caliban and Prospero while also drastically altering the final scene from a scene of peace to a clash between two ideals. William Shakespeare made The Tempest in the 17th century which was unique from his other plays since this play has a somewhat happy ending where many of his other plays, such as Romeo and Juliet, Hamlet, and Julius Caesar, have tragic endings. Aime Cesaire’s A Tempest was an adaptation of the original play that was made primarily for a black theater
The producers, it seems while trying to make the movie fit the modern times, they cutout or changed certain things about characters, theme, and symbols that caused it to be slight different from the book. The fact is that no matter how well the movie covers the book, there will always be some noticeable difference, as Fitzgerald’s words from the book paint’s a vivid picture of the scenes, that it’s come to life in the mind of its reader. Therefore, even with a perfect design, cast, and performance, any movie version can only disappoint. One of the biggest difference can be seen in the theme representation of the American Dream. While the movie shows the achievement of the American dream, the book shows its failure.
As the mood of a character changes, they may change from one medium to the other in mid-scene. Jaques cuts off a prose dialogue with Rosalind because Orlando enters, using verse: "Nay then, God be with you, a you talk in blank verse" (4.1.29). The defiance of convention is continued when the epilogue is given in prose. Extended Metaphors – In Act I, Shakespeare personifies Fortune and Nature in order to convey a central theme of the play: that Fortune and Nature often work at odds. The extended metaphors, in the form of personifications, occur in Scene II in a discussion of Fortune and Nature between Celia and Rosalind: .
I believe that the purpose of this is so that the readers can easily relate to the characters depending on which generic personalities they have. By giving two different generic personality traits, the readers can relate to either characters they feel more connected to. In contrast, some people may believe that Stoppard did not describe who Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are because many people already know that they are from the famous Shakespeare’s play, Hamlet. Still, just because they are part of a different famous play, it does not mean the readers know what kinds of men they are. By generalizing the two main characters’ personalities, Stoppard’s intention to help the readers personally relate to the events that happen to the characters in the script is very
The Comedy of Errors: A Convoluted Disaster. Not all plays are created equally. When I reflect on the Comedy of Errors, directed by Jeffery Renn, I was expecting a thought-provoking modern take on Sir William Shakespeare’s famous play. However, what I witnessed on Saturday, March 24th, was a disastrous attempt to force modern pop-culture and a classic play together. In this critique of The Comedy of Errors, I will be focusing on the editorial direction and technical effects, and I will analyze how effectively Jeffery used these techniques.
Appearance constantly shows up in America today. People will go out of their way to buy fancy clothes to project an image of themselves that does not fit their personality. Although this happens many want to show their true personalities, they tend to shy away from people and terrified of showing their true nature. Just as in Shakespeare’s plays Macbeth and Hamlet many of the characters struggle with showing their true personality. Shakespeare strives to show through these plays that it is not always what is on the outside of a man, but what is on the inside.