Romeo and Juliet can be interpreted in many different ways, even though it follows the same script. Franco Zeffirelli’s Romeo and Juliet and Baz Luhrmann’s Romeo + Juliet are similar in many ways, however they also differ significantly. Both films are based on Shakespeare’s play and have used the language in which Shakespeare originally wrote the play. However, in Baz Luhrmann’s version, some lines have been cut. Both films provide very different perspectives on Shakespeare's text because of the different eras in which they were set.
I believe that Jefferson contributions to the country are greater than his character flaws and I also believe that no good can come from revealing them. He was the founder of our country and also helped shaped the country so we can be where we are right now. Regarding slavery, I believe that Jefferson knew it was wrong but maybe he didn’t know what to do about it at the time, He didn’t have enough power to stop it so he had to live with it knowing it was wrong and immoral, and He also proposed a bill to stop slavery but it was not approved. Thomas Jefferson is the author of the Declaration of American independence. That is how is written on his tombstone and it should be remember that way, like a hero.
Although Randel puts forth some peculiar evidence, he is able to explain and utilize historical facts to further strengthen his argument. Because I am not very familiar to the facts and details of the French Revolution, I had a hard time associating Randel’s ideas to the plot of Frankenstein. Nevertheless, he did use a lot of background knowledge to accommodate a person who does not have a lot of knowledge of the French Revolution. Randel’s essay starts off strong with excellent points about the correlation between certain characters and their actions in different geopolitical places, but some of his later
Elizabeth Loch Shakespeare I Dr. Jack Hibbard 12/21/12 Examining Homoeroticism in Shakespeare’s The Twelfth Night One can never predict what will turn up when they begin to delve into any aspect of a Shakespeare play. So taking on something as complex and labyrinthine as sexuality, predictably, churned out thoughts connected to theories, intertwined with concepts, and laced with arguments. Because of the nature of this subject, this is not an argument to prove a thesis. This is an examination of the sexuality in Shakespeare's The Twelfth Night. A major theme that has been discussed in the literary community is the homoeroticism in the play.
Themes in Shakespeare’s Much Ado About Nothing When studying his plays it becomes apparent that William Shakespeare includes four themes in most of his plays. These themes include conflict, appearance versus reality, order and disorder, and change or metamorphosis. This is particularly true in his comedy Much Ado About Nothing. Most of these themes are woven within the tumultuous relationship between Beatrice and Benedick In this play the theme of conflict can be portrayed in various ways. Conflict is the struggle between opposing forces.
The Shakespeare authorship question is the argument about whether someone other than William Shakespeare of Stratford-upon-Avon wrote the works attributed to him. Anti-Stratfordians—a collective term for adherents of the various alternative-authorship theories—say that Shakespeare of Stratford was a front to shield the identity of the real author or authors, who for some reason did not want or could not accept public credit. Although the idea has attracted much public interest, all but a few Shakespeare scholars and literary historians consider it a fringe belief and for the most part disregard it except to rebut or disparage the claims. Shakespeare's authorship was first questioned in the middle of the 19th century, when adulation of Shakespeare as the greatest writer of all time had become widespread. Shakespeare's biography, particularly his humble origins and obscure life, seemed incompatible with his poetic eminence and his reputation for genius, arousing suspicion that Shakespeare might not have written the works attributed to him.
The book declares that Marco Polo became an influential and important figure under the service of the Mongol Leader Kublai Khan. However, many modern scholars, notably Frances Wood, contradict this, debating how much of the content is true and whether or not Marco Polo actually traveled to Kublai Khan’s court or was just making up the story to gain credit. Marco Polo may indeed have overstated his own importance to gain distinction, but there is no strong positive evidence to support the theory of Marco Polo not having gone to China. After about seventeen years in a foreign land, it would have been very difficult for Marco Polo to remember every single thing he saw. At the time of his death, when he
For Richard Kelly, as for most readers, Graham Greene remains "first and foremost" a novelist - and one of the relatively few in recent decades to attract serious critical attention while earning wide sales. Kelly believes that "Greene's future reputation will clearly be based upon the quality of his many novels." But he also clearly suggests that the critical response to Greene's work is "out of balance," for it has largely ignored his achievements in drama, film criticism, travel writing - and, of course, short fiction. As Kelly notes, Greene himself abetted this neglect by insisting for years that the short stories he published throughout his long career were simply "escapes from the novelist's world"; they were "escapades" - even "scraps." Perhaps most of his admirers will concede that not every Greene story is a gem; many, in fact, are undeniably slight.
However, Shakespeare’s works in particular do not exactly play that role in today’s society because the things he wrote about cannot be related in today’s modern context. A few examples of such irrelevant works to our lives would be: Romeo and Juliet, Twelfth Night, Much Ado About Nothing and The Merchant of Venice. For something to be relevant in our lives, it has to be related mostly to what we do and say quite often. Most of the time, it has to affect our decision-making and actions. On the contrary, I personally feel that Shakespeare’s works do not do so because I don’t
In the eighteenth century, critics suggested that the delay is a necessary plot device to extend the action. However, this suggestion does not fit the facts, since there would then be no reason for Shakespeare to make the delay so conspicuous by having Hamlet bemoan it over two long soliloquies. At the end of the eighteenth century, Goethe proposed that Shakespeare means, in Hamlet, to "represent the effects of a great action laid