Tuesday, August 11, 2009
The Tempest
To be honest, I’ve never been a fan of Shakespeare. I can hardly stand to read his stuff. It’s just not my thing. But The Tempest was more tolerable than his other plays, and it’s due to the fact that Shakespeare used magic in this play. The use of magic is something I’ve never seen in any of his work, and it surprised me a bit. The fantasy elements of The Tempest made it more interesting than the rest of Shakespeare’s work, but are scarce enough to make the story believable. Instead of soaking the story in magic, it’s only dipped in magical elements. The beginning of the play is also different than most – it starts with a great conflict (The Tempest itself), with unnamed characters. Many of Shakespeare’s other plays start by introducing some or all of the characters, but we don’t learn the character’s names until we meet Prospero. While I found the story uninteresting (Prospero wants revenge, and his daughter falls in love with one of the first men she sees. Yes, that’s nice and all, but hardly surprising) the comedic adventures of Caliban, Stephano, and Triniculo of a bit of an escape from the main story. Shakespeare’s writing style also didn’t help to keep me interested, but Sparknotes helped with that. All in all, this story is better than most of Shakespeare’s stories, because of the use of fantasy and magic, and I’d recommend it to anyone who’s not really a big fan of Shakespeare.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Actually, Shakespeare uses alot of magic in his works. A Midsummer Night's Dream was full of magical elements; Shakespeare used fairies as some of the characters. Macbeth also had some magic by having the three witches and their famous cauldron. Alhtough, Shakespeare doesn't usually include magic in his plays, it's not uncommon.
ReplyDeleteCastle (Daniel, I'm assuming), I'm going to use your blog comments to post my blog because I failed to get signed up somehow. So here goes:
ReplyDeleteI love it when Shakespeare adds magic to his plays. The Tempest was enjoyable, except I had to re-read many parts because a lot of the dialouge was very difficult to understand and I kept getting confused, but I'm glad I plowed through it. The characters actually made me laugh (except Miranda, because she's boring) and they were also very complex. My two favorites were Ariel and Caliban. They are what I like to call "ying-yang characters" because they contrast each other. Caliban mirros Ariel's words and actions, but he contrast them by doing almost the opposite of what she does. The only problem I really had with him was how crude and rude he is, like when he expresses how he will undo Miranda's "virgin knot." Even so, he was my favorite.
Both of your interpretations are so different! I honestly had never even heard of The Tempest but it seems like it was a good read. However, I like it how Carla mentioned the undoing of Miranda's "virgin knot" because I absolutely love how Shakespeare uses a play on words. It seems like he does it effortlessly because when you notice it in one of his works, it just flows so perfectly with the story and adds the right amount of wit to make it enjoyable and humorous.
ReplyDeleteAnd.. Carla and Daniel I'm going to use your post as my blog to because I'm not registered either!
ReplyDeleteThe Taming of the Shrew came off to me as a domineering "macho" male tale about a man turning a free spirited, independent woman, though an ill tempered one, into a domesticated wife on a short leash. At the very end of the play when Petruchio bets with the other males that he can get his wife, Katherine (the tamed shrew), to come at his request because she is so "whipped" is the point where it completely confirmed, in my mind, that it was indeed the "macho" male tale I had thought it was. Even so, I'm still really glad Shakespeare wrote it because then there would be no 10 Things I Hate About You!
Agreeing with the above, The Tempest isn't alone in its fantasy elements, Shakespeare has used them in some of his other plays. Agreeing some more, I do find these to be more enjoyable than some of his more "realistic" plays, particularly as it's often employed as an almost comic element in and of itself, even if the play is entirely serious. Such as in Macbeth, where the witches, although dark and serious, seem a bit goofy in their words and actions, and most of the faeries in A Midsummer Night's Dream are raucous and fussy, and all this almost as if Shakespeare is poking fun at fantasy.
ReplyDelete