Willy Russell uses superiority theory to engage the audience by creating comedy through the misfortune of others. The character of Frank is very cynical as he fails to see the good in anybody for a majority of the play and he believes that other people are motivated purely by self-interest. However, some people may argue that cruelty and cynicism are not at the heart of the comedy in the play and that the play could still be successful without these themes. One theme that could be seen as superior to cruelty and cynicism is culture and class because this theme causes confusion and misunderstanding between the two characters which as a result produces comedy. In the play ‘Educating Rita’ cruelty and cynicism feature a great deal.
Watching Othello, I already knew the underlined themes and symbolism, etc. because I had gone over it in previous classes; however, while I was watching the play I tried to block out what I “imagined” had occurred versus what the director’s vision of the play was. One of the reasons I do not like to read a play before watching it is because it conflicts with my vision or version of what it would have been. For instance, I imagined Iago as a very sinful villain and not as slick as he was played; however I can see both character directions. None the less, the play and actors were very good and I loved how the director made use of the space.
Some may ask, "Is Caesar a hero, or just an ignorant tyrant?" others ask "Were Brutus' intentions as pure as we thought?" I think in The Tragedy of Julius Caesar, William Shakespeare revealed the major character flaws of each individual in this play. As an example, Brutus loved Rome with a passion. But his love for Rome caused him to do something that not many other people would ever dream of doing.
Noble also showed me through the article how smart Shakespeare was by using comedy in “Titus Andronicus” right before some most violent scenes, so the audience would not get discomfort or turn off by seeing their normal practices being depicted on stage My favorite part of Noble’s essay is how he breaks down the parallel between Titus and Oswald Caroll recipe for human flesh. It let me, as a reader; understand how much research Shakespeare must have gone through to make sure his play matched up with medicinal cannibalism views. The explicit language of how cannibals cooked the human flesh and believed that eating humans could be therapeutic was very intriguing. Through reading this essay I have gained a greater appreciation for Shakespeare writing and “Titus Andronicus” as a play. Noble truly opened my eyes to a new world I never knew existed, medicinal cannibalism.
Brecht consistently uses comedy throughout his play to make a darker point. However, Gold strays from this approach and instead heightens and adds comical elements in an attempt to amuse his audience further. One must remember that Brecht’s original play – even though an entertaining play – was essentially used as a didactic tool and that people chose wether or not they wished to come and view the performance. Gold’s adaptation of the play was made in 1972 and therefore targeted a very different audience – television viewers. It is for this reason that Gold has twisted (and even added to) Bretch’s wry, black humour into high comedy – in a bid to appease and
Thar. Experience 170 The Idiot “play analysis” In “The Idiot” I think Dostoyevsky was trying to show how twisted our society is, and how even a saint of a person is treated badly without deserve. I believe Dostoyevsky wrote this play with mostly realistic qualities, such as how people take advantage of “the nice guy” all the time with Prince Myshkin continuously being tricked by everyone he knew, and how the power of love makes you do crazy things with Rogozhin killing Nastasya even though he would have given anything to be with her. I thought most of the actors did a really good job. I did not like how some of the actors played double roles because in an already confusing play trying to follow “who is who” is not an easy task.
Besides, all kind of illegal or immoral activities would remain and root deeply in the society if most of citizens are ignorance. In the play, ignorance is apparently portrayed and paralleled to the compact majority. The compact majority can be compared to un-educated people who are generally seen in many developing countries. Compared the Bath to technology development or social development, the city cannot accomplish this development surely since the compact majority is ignorance. Ibsen, faithfully, wrote the play as a way to criticize Europe society at the times when people were not interested in any technologies and truths.
This conflict between them causes comedy as there are misunderstandings, which are amusing and the audience feel superiority over the characters who do not understand some of each other’s references. At the start of the play when Rita refers to a poem about “fightin’ death an’ disease”, Frank automatically assumes its “Dylan Thomas” as Thomas’s poem about death is a part of the literary canon. However Rita replies it’s “Roger McGough’s” poem that she’s describing. This misunderstanding conveys to the audience that these characters would not conventionally associate with each other. It could be amusing to the audience as it highlights the absurdity of the situation.
Finally, as Hamlet saw Claudius in prayer he was discontent with just killing Claudius. His mannerisms in the movie were excellent to display exactly how one would expect Hamlet to behave in this scene. The Passion in the play is very obvious. Some films have trouble producing this passion. Zeffirelli exceeds in this category as well.
In Macbeth’s as well as Shakespeare’s thinking, all people in this life are just bad, stupid actors- shouting and running about and generally making a lot of noise and fuss but not much sense, and then they die anyway and become completely meaningless. With another metaphor, he considers his life is not different from an idiot's tale which is full of bombast and melodrama, but without meaning. Shakespeare may be so depressed when he wrote these final lines that he considers life as walking shadow and not real enough. In my opinion, when writing these lines, Shakespeare want to send us a message that life is something that we have to take as it comes and it is unpredictable, when being brought to life we have to accept it and to necessarily beautify it. The naked truth is