So we've finally made it. This is it readers, the most important scene in the play, the scene the whole story pivots around. This is Act Four, Scene One AKA the wedding scene. It is odd, then, that this scene, of all scenes, starts with an (admittedly very brief) bit of comedy involving Claudio saying "No" (line 5) to the question of whether he would marry Hero and everybody just ignoring it and proceeding with the marrage ceremony. Naturaly, however, this comedic start is then plunged into much more serious waters shortly afterwards, line 28 in fact...
From line 28 to line 40, Claudio rails off a pre-prepared verbal assult on Hero, who he calls a "rotten orange" and a "maid". Answer me this, does Claudio once in the barrage make any reference to Borachio the man who he saw "talking to" the woman he thought was Hero? No he does not. Why? Because he doesn't want to "own" Borachio. He wants to "own" (as Elizibethan men did to their wives) Hero, like you would own an orange, or a maid. Claudio wants Hero as a status symbol, as I have typed before, and he would rather shame and humiliate Hero (and to a far lesser extent, Leonardo) than, y'know, maybe ask her in private or judge her character and assess whether she is likely to have "spoken" to any men in the past. Of course, the second option doesn't seem very likely, as if you can't tell that Don John isn't to be trusted after going to war with him for pressumably quite some time, then I very much doubt that Hero would be within the realms of assesability for gullable old Claudio. The entire speach is said in verse, like most of Claudio's lines. I assume this is one of Shakespeare's ways of communicating to the audience that this is serious, as most bits of comedy in this play are in blank verse. Could it be that verse is used for serious elements of the play and blank verse for the comedy?
After Claudio's public denouncement of Hero, he and the brothers Don proceed to convince Leonato of her guilt from line 41 to line 107. It really doesn't take the three men very long at all to convince HERO'S OWN FATHER of her dishonesty. Surely Leonato of anybody would not believe Hero's guilt, but that fine honour would fall with Beatrice, Hero's friend. Could Shakespeare be making a comment on Elizabethan England disguised behind the mask of a play set in Messina? Could he possibly be suggesting that rich fathers ought to know their children more? It would certainly help Leonato if he knew Hero more, because Beatrice, who, having been Hero's "bedfellow" for a year, actually knows Hero and so believes her to be innocent and wrongly accused by Claudio and the two Princes.
Read line 107. Read it? Good. "Hath no man's dagger here a point for me?". This line said by Leonato has two possible meanings, that he has been shamed by the accusations or that he is being overly dramatic about everything in order to pile more humiliation on Hero. I am inclined to believe that it is the latter, as he exclaims rather melodramatically that "death is the fairest cover for HER shame" (line 115). He refers to the shame as her's, rather than his or the family name. I accept that he must feel a little ashamed, because why else would he do something so morraly repugnant as to wish death upon his child, but as I say, he still refers to the shame all being on the shoulders of Hero.
Now read line from 123 to 125. Did Leonato really just say that? This man has been utterly convinced of Hero's guilt that he would murder her, had she not passed out already. This is serious subject matter for a supposed comedy, in fact, i'd go as far as to say that it was damn near tragedy matterial! And what evidence would he murder her on? The words of three men and nothing more. Again, Shakespeare could be making a comment here on Elizabethan society. Three men accusing one woman of misdeeds and the woman being killed without a trial or any investigation into the misdeed? Sounds like a witch hunt to me, which were common in Shakespeareian England. Could it be that Shakespeare was against such practices and included evidence of this in his plays, or am I reading too much into it?
From line 153 to line 167, the Friar has a speach, in which he declares that he is on the side of Hero. Hero, being a christian as everyone had to be in Messina by law (and England, what a coincidence), would have gone to confession and confessed all of her various and pressumably minor sins to the Friar. So, in that way, the Friar would know that she wasn't the sort of person to do such a thing. The Friar is the only male character not to believe Claudio's tale of misdeeds, and he is also the male character that knows her the most. This scene is all very serious...
In line 202, the Friar hatches a plan to make Claudio and the other men (minus Benedick and Leonato) believe that Hero were dead. Do you know of any other Shakespeare plays in which a friar has a plan to make it seem that a lady is dead, when in fact, she is not? Yes, Romeo and Juliet. That play was a tragedy, so could it be that Shakespeare is trying to imply to the audience that this play is heading that way too?
After the Friar, Leonato and Hero leave in order to set up the Friar's plan, Benedick and Beatrice the comedic characters are left alone. In line 285, grief stricken Beatrice says a very un-comedic thing indeed. She asks Benedick to "Kill Claudio". How could it be that even the comedic characters are now acting serious? This play has taken a turn for the tragic.
Right, now that i've typed eight paragraphs about the first scene in the act, we'll move onto the one that I am going to write about the second scene. The second scene that I mention is very much light relief after the wedding scene. In fact, almost all of this scene, in which Borachio and Conrade are questioned by the police, is comedic, bar prehaps two lines that Dogberry (the clown/fool) says. The two lines of seriousness are lines 39 and 40, where Dogberry calls it "flat perjury" to call Don John a villain. Could it be that Shakespeare was making a comment on the royal families of Europe's immunity to the laws that they themselves created? Yes, I think he could.
Wednesday, 31 October 2012
Monday, 29 October 2012
Comedic and serious elements in Act Three of Much Ado About Nothing
Act three scene one is 116 lines of comedy in which Hero and Ursula convince Beatrice that Benedick loves her by disgusing the matter within her earshot. This is the exact same way that Benedick was convinced of Beatrice's love for him, but with his friends rather than Beatrice's being the perveyors of the news. It is a comedic scene for the same reason that act two scene three was, the way in which the audience knows more about the situation than the main character in the scene does. Benedick doesn't really love Beatrice, we, the audience know this, but by making Benedick believe that Beatrice loves him and Beatrice believe that Benedick loves her, it creates a couple of comedic scenes. Nothing serious here.
In the second scene, for the first 71 lines, or until Don John enters, would you believe it, there is some comedy about how Benedick has "gone soft" (soft enough to *gasp* wash his face) but from then on till the end of the scene, it gets all serious. This is the scene in which Don John tells Claudio that his wife-to-be is "unfaithful" and Claudio, the gullable Claudio who believed Don John last time when he told him that Don Pedro had woo'd Hero for himself at the masked ball, believes him again. If only he had been engaged to Hero a little longer, actually got to know her a little more, possibly if he had, and this is a long shot, actually "wooed" Hero himself, he wouldn't believe Don John without proof. But as it is, Claudio actually plans how he will humiliate the woman he is supposed to love without any evidence but the words of one man, Don John. However, Don John ISN'T just one man, he is the brother of the Prince. Could it be that, by setting this play in a foriegn land that Shakespeare is trying to cover some sort of message here about the extreame misuse of power in autocracies? Could it be that Claudio is only believeing Don John's wicked lies because he is in such a high place in society, or does he only want Hero as a status symbol, and what sort of status symbol is a "disloyal" bride? Could it be that he actually wants to marry Don John, because it would seem that he'd rather marry anyone but Hero his defence for her in the face of the disloyalty allegations is so weak, nay, non-exsistant? To summarise, then, act three, scene two is a scene of two halves, comedic, then serious.
From 1 to 92 in scene number three is comedic. It features Dogberry, Verges and a couple of watchmen discussing what to do in certain situations, but it's main aim is to show the audience that these are the clowns/fools of the piece. The second half of the scene is also pretty comedic, but this time, it's between Borachio and Conrade, Don John's companions. Borrachio has just "seen" Margaret in Hero's room and he is telling Conrade about it and what he is going to spend his thousand ducats on. That description made it sound as if the scene might have a slight serious element to it, but it really doesn't, unless you count the two men being caught by the watchmen at the end of the scene and them being taken in for questioning at the police station (and probably tortured...).
In act three, scene four, nothing much of note happens, bar Hero getting ready for her wedding and the ladies establishing that Beatrice loves Benedick in the same way that he loves her, but not in a particually comedic way.
Scene five of the act is also pretty light on content, i'm afraid! In it, Dogberry, the clown/fool tells Leonardo that they have captured "two knaves" but, being a clown/fool, does not tell him what they said about Hero. Despite including a clown/fool, though, this scene does not contain any comedic elements, or, for that matter, any serious ones either. It is simply there to push the plot forwards.
In the second scene, for the first 71 lines, or until Don John enters, would you believe it, there is some comedy about how Benedick has "gone soft" (soft enough to *gasp* wash his face) but from then on till the end of the scene, it gets all serious. This is the scene in which Don John tells Claudio that his wife-to-be is "unfaithful" and Claudio, the gullable Claudio who believed Don John last time when he told him that Don Pedro had woo'd Hero for himself at the masked ball, believes him again. If only he had been engaged to Hero a little longer, actually got to know her a little more, possibly if he had, and this is a long shot, actually "wooed" Hero himself, he wouldn't believe Don John without proof. But as it is, Claudio actually plans how he will humiliate the woman he is supposed to love without any evidence but the words of one man, Don John. However, Don John ISN'T just one man, he is the brother of the Prince. Could it be that, by setting this play in a foriegn land that Shakespeare is trying to cover some sort of message here about the extreame misuse of power in autocracies? Could it be that Claudio is only believeing Don John's wicked lies because he is in such a high place in society, or does he only want Hero as a status symbol, and what sort of status symbol is a "disloyal" bride? Could it be that he actually wants to marry Don John, because it would seem that he'd rather marry anyone but Hero his defence for her in the face of the disloyalty allegations is so weak, nay, non-exsistant? To summarise, then, act three, scene two is a scene of two halves, comedic, then serious.
From 1 to 92 in scene number three is comedic. It features Dogberry, Verges and a couple of watchmen discussing what to do in certain situations, but it's main aim is to show the audience that these are the clowns/fools of the piece. The second half of the scene is also pretty comedic, but this time, it's between Borachio and Conrade, Don John's companions. Borrachio has just "seen" Margaret in Hero's room and he is telling Conrade about it and what he is going to spend his thousand ducats on. That description made it sound as if the scene might have a slight serious element to it, but it really doesn't, unless you count the two men being caught by the watchmen at the end of the scene and them being taken in for questioning at the police station (and probably tortured...).
In act three, scene four, nothing much of note happens, bar Hero getting ready for her wedding and the ladies establishing that Beatrice loves Benedick in the same way that he loves her, but not in a particually comedic way.
Scene five of the act is also pretty light on content, i'm afraid! In it, Dogberry, the clown/fool tells Leonardo that they have captured "two knaves" but, being a clown/fool, does not tell him what they said about Hero. Despite including a clown/fool, though, this scene does not contain any comedic elements, or, for that matter, any serious ones either. It is simply there to push the plot forwards.
Comedic and serious elements in Act Two of Much Ado About Nothing
Act Two, scene one begins with some comedy. Interestingly, this time it doesn't involve the Benedick Vs. Beatrice arguments that so dominated the comedy in act one, it only involves Beatrice being witty to Leonato after having been told that she should get a husband. Nothing serious in that opening, but it just underlines that Beatrice does not want to marry.
From line 100 to line 110 there is some comedy that (shock) doesn't actually involve either Benedick or Beatrice! It's all about Antonio pretending not to be himself to Ursula. He is able to do this because by this point, all the characters are wearing masks at a "masked ball". Those ten lines of Antonio to Ursula flavored comedy, it turns out, were actually just a set up for the thirty lines that follow which taste distinctly of Benedick and Beatrice. In them, Beatrice insults Benedick to somebody in disguise. Of course, us audience members can tell that the person is actually Benedick, but Beatrice has no idea, which is what makes it funny.
From line 141 to 167, Don John convinces Claudio that Don Pedro is going to marry Hero. This could be taken as comedic, because of just how quickly and easily he falls for it, but personally, I think it to be serious, because, just like that, Claudio calls Hero a "witch" and says that "friendship is constant in all other things save in office and affairs of love" about Don Pedro. So Claudio is ready to denounce his best friend who he's been together with through a war and the lady that he fancies, just because of what Don John told him. This shows the audience that Claudio is an impulsive character and also foreshadows the events of act four scene one...
After those serious few lines, we get some comedy. From 219 to 239, Benedick rants about Beatrice and how he would never, ever marry her. In fact, Benedick makes it so clear that he would never marry her that the audience all know that he means precisely the opposite and before the end of the play, Benedick and Beatrice will be married. If it had been Claudio ranting about Hero, then everything would be different. It would be a serious rant because Claudio is a serious character, whereas the audience know that Benedick is joking because that's what he does, joke, although from line 255 to 258, Beatrice does give a hint that they have a history together. Apparently Benedick won her heart with "false dice" making her now say that she has "lost it". Again, as with Benedick's rant, if that had been said by a serious character like Claudio or Hero, then you might have had some misgivings about their relationship, but as it was said by Beatrice, the audience all but knows that she'll get it back. From the 335th line to the end of the scene, Don Pedro, Leonato, Claudio and Hero all conspire to get Beartrice and Benedick into a "mountain of affection", so even the characters in the play know that those two would secretly, deep down want to be together!
Act two scene two is an extreamely short scene, it's only fifty one lines, but all of them are serious. In this scene, Don John and his follower Borachio plot how to ruin Claudio and Hero's marrage. All very serious, but sometimes there needs to be serious scenes to make the comedic scenes more funny.
In act two, scene three, Benedick rants again about how he shall be a batchelor all his life, double underlining it to anyone in the audience that didn't get it the first time that Benedick will get married before the end of the play. From line 90 right through to line 214 Leonardo and Don Pedro discus, within the earshot of Benedick, how much Beatrice loves him. This is most definately comedic as we know that Beatrice says the very opposite about Benedick, but Benedick himself doesn't know this and is so tricked into believing that Beatrice actually does fancy him. The act ends with yet another comedic conversation between the two B's. It would seem rather like scene three were trying to make up for scene two's seriousness by containing so much comedy, for that's what the play is meant to be, anyway.
From line 100 to line 110 there is some comedy that (shock) doesn't actually involve either Benedick or Beatrice! It's all about Antonio pretending not to be himself to Ursula. He is able to do this because by this point, all the characters are wearing masks at a "masked ball". Those ten lines of Antonio to Ursula flavored comedy, it turns out, were actually just a set up for the thirty lines that follow which taste distinctly of Benedick and Beatrice. In them, Beatrice insults Benedick to somebody in disguise. Of course, us audience members can tell that the person is actually Benedick, but Beatrice has no idea, which is what makes it funny.
From line 141 to 167, Don John convinces Claudio that Don Pedro is going to marry Hero. This could be taken as comedic, because of just how quickly and easily he falls for it, but personally, I think it to be serious, because, just like that, Claudio calls Hero a "witch" and says that "friendship is constant in all other things save in office and affairs of love" about Don Pedro. So Claudio is ready to denounce his best friend who he's been together with through a war and the lady that he fancies, just because of what Don John told him. This shows the audience that Claudio is an impulsive character and also foreshadows the events of act four scene one...
After those serious few lines, we get some comedy. From 219 to 239, Benedick rants about Beatrice and how he would never, ever marry her. In fact, Benedick makes it so clear that he would never marry her that the audience all know that he means precisely the opposite and before the end of the play, Benedick and Beatrice will be married. If it had been Claudio ranting about Hero, then everything would be different. It would be a serious rant because Claudio is a serious character, whereas the audience know that Benedick is joking because that's what he does, joke, although from line 255 to 258, Beatrice does give a hint that they have a history together. Apparently Benedick won her heart with "false dice" making her now say that she has "lost it". Again, as with Benedick's rant, if that had been said by a serious character like Claudio or Hero, then you might have had some misgivings about their relationship, but as it was said by Beatrice, the audience all but knows that she'll get it back. From the 335th line to the end of the scene, Don Pedro, Leonato, Claudio and Hero all conspire to get Beartrice and Benedick into a "mountain of affection", so even the characters in the play know that those two would secretly, deep down want to be together!
Act two scene two is an extreamely short scene, it's only fifty one lines, but all of them are serious. In this scene, Don John and his follower Borachio plot how to ruin Claudio and Hero's marrage. All very serious, but sometimes there needs to be serious scenes to make the comedic scenes more funny.
In act two, scene three, Benedick rants again about how he shall be a batchelor all his life, double underlining it to anyone in the audience that didn't get it the first time that Benedick will get married before the end of the play. From line 90 right through to line 214 Leonardo and Don Pedro discus, within the earshot of Benedick, how much Beatrice loves him. This is most definately comedic as we know that Beatrice says the very opposite about Benedick, but Benedick himself doesn't know this and is so tricked into believing that Beatrice actually does fancy him. The act ends with yet another comedic conversation between the two B's. It would seem rather like scene three were trying to make up for scene two's seriousness by containing so much comedy, for that's what the play is meant to be, anyway.
Wednesday, 17 October 2012
How is the comedy in act one of Much Ado About Nothing constructed? Also, what serious elements are emerging and how are they presented to us dramatically?
The comedy in Much Ado About nothing is mainly constructed from the word play between Benedick and Beatrice. The first time this happens is line 108 in scene one of the first act, where Beatrice starts an argument. Almost all of the comedy in the play (and definitely all in act one) is constructed in this way with the arguments between the two intriguingly "sharp tongued" characters. This is the only comedy to be found in act one which is mainly devoted to introducing the characters, their traits and their motivations.
An example of a serious element in this supposed comedy is that some of the male characters (Don Pedro, Claudio, Benedick, Balthasar and Don John, to be precise) have just returned from war. This is only touched upon very briefly right at the very begining of Act 1 with Leonato asking a messenger questions about it, but none the less, war is definitely no laughing matter.
Another example of a serious element is Don John being evil and saying to his followers (in line 25 of Act 1, Scene 3) that the would rather be a "canker in a hedge than a rose on his grace". A "canker" is a disease that plants get, so what Don John is saying is that he'd rather make a hedge ill than make "his grace"(god?) smell like roses. This and all of Don John's other lines in the first paragraph are said in blank verse, as opposed to the lines of his brother, Don Pedro, who speaks in verse ( most of the time iambic pentameter). This could be used to imply that he is a villain (although he admits this himself) or that he is talking about bad things. Either way, he is definitely serious.
An example of a serious element in this supposed comedy is that some of the male characters (Don Pedro, Claudio, Benedick, Balthasar and Don John, to be precise) have just returned from war. This is only touched upon very briefly right at the very begining of Act 1 with Leonato asking a messenger questions about it, but none the less, war is definitely no laughing matter.
Another example of a serious element is Don John being evil and saying to his followers (in line 25 of Act 1, Scene 3) that the would rather be a "canker in a hedge than a rose on his grace". A "canker" is a disease that plants get, so what Don John is saying is that he'd rather make a hedge ill than make "his grace"(god?) smell like roses. This and all of Don John's other lines in the first paragraph are said in blank verse, as opposed to the lines of his brother, Don Pedro, who speaks in verse ( most of the time iambic pentameter). This could be used to imply that he is a villain (although he admits this himself) or that he is talking about bad things. Either way, he is definitely serious.
Saturday, 13 October 2012
An evaluation on 50 lines of Robert Browning's "The Pied Piper of Hamelin"
The fifty lines that I have chosen to evaluate are lines 205 to 255, from the end of stanza twelve to the end of stanza thirteen.
In the very first line of this extract, there is an example of a language feature, a Simile. The children who the Pied Piper is leading away have "teeth like pearls". Browning uses the word "pearls" because pearls are shiny and white, like the children's teeth. Adult's teeth in 1376 (the year in which the poem is set) would have been all manky and rotten and falling out because they hadn't invented toothpaste or false teeth yet! Whiteness was also a symbol of how rich you were, because if you had to work outside everyday on the land, then you would have been sunburned and crispy, but if you could afford to stay indoors all day while your servants did your housework for you, then you would have been whiter than white.
All the way through the poem (including my extract) Browning uses a rhyming scheme and, although it doesn't seem to follow any set pattern (e.g. AABBAA or ABAB) this creates a general atmosphere of a jaunty tale for children, as all poems for children have a rhyme to keep them interested. As an interesting side note to this, the sub-title of the poem is "A child's story", although whether this is because of the story's child friendly rhyming or because it's about the Pied Piper stealing all of the children is unclear. Another feature of this poem is it's clear splitting into stanzas. This could be argued to support the child friendly argument about this poem, because if everything is in one long block of text without stanzas, like Porphyrias lover, people tend to lose interest and which type of people have the shortest attention spans? Why, children, natrualy. These stanzas are also numbered like chapters in a book so the hypothetical child reading the story (or, to be fair, anyone) would know where to start reading the story again after having left it because they have short attention spans.
Line 214 contains another language feature, this time a metaphore. The line says that the Mayor was "on the rack". The Mayor was not litterally "on the rack", but by using a familiar term like "on the rack", Browning makes the tone of the poem more informal than, say, The Patriot or The Laboratory, and thus, more child friendly. I believe that this technique works because, well, have you ever tried reading up on Kantian ethics? Dull as ditchwater! If only they'd throw in some familiar phrases (like "dull as ditchwater") maybe i'd find RS easier, because I could relate to it, like I can relate to this poem!
As my last point, I would like to say that, at the start of lines 220, 221, 225, 229 ect., a grand total of 17 times in my extract, lines are started with the word "and". This would be to move the poem on at a very rapid pace when a person is reading it aloud, as you might to a child. The "ands" also serve as discourse markers, rather than simply just connectives because they are used so often, it's almost like saying "like" after everything you say, like. People in general tend to use discourse markers all the time in speach, which backs up my point of the informality of the poem. From line 246 through to 249, the "lame" boy's description is particularly full of these "ands", as the boy is presumably fondly remembering what the Piper told him and his "playmates" about what the reader could interpret to be heaven. The "ands" are also written here to show how often the boy has told his story, as the "ands" make it flow quickly.
In the very first line of this extract, there is an example of a language feature, a Simile. The children who the Pied Piper is leading away have "teeth like pearls". Browning uses the word "pearls" because pearls are shiny and white, like the children's teeth. Adult's teeth in 1376 (the year in which the poem is set) would have been all manky and rotten and falling out because they hadn't invented toothpaste or false teeth yet! Whiteness was also a symbol of how rich you were, because if you had to work outside everyday on the land, then you would have been sunburned and crispy, but if you could afford to stay indoors all day while your servants did your housework for you, then you would have been whiter than white.
All the way through the poem (including my extract) Browning uses a rhyming scheme and, although it doesn't seem to follow any set pattern (e.g. AABBAA or ABAB) this creates a general atmosphere of a jaunty tale for children, as all poems for children have a rhyme to keep them interested. As an interesting side note to this, the sub-title of the poem is "A child's story", although whether this is because of the story's child friendly rhyming or because it's about the Pied Piper stealing all of the children is unclear. Another feature of this poem is it's clear splitting into stanzas. This could be argued to support the child friendly argument about this poem, because if everything is in one long block of text without stanzas, like Porphyrias lover, people tend to lose interest and which type of people have the shortest attention spans? Why, children, natrualy. These stanzas are also numbered like chapters in a book so the hypothetical child reading the story (or, to be fair, anyone) would know where to start reading the story again after having left it because they have short attention spans.
Line 214 contains another language feature, this time a metaphore. The line says that the Mayor was "on the rack". The Mayor was not litterally "on the rack", but by using a familiar term like "on the rack", Browning makes the tone of the poem more informal than, say, The Patriot or The Laboratory, and thus, more child friendly. I believe that this technique works because, well, have you ever tried reading up on Kantian ethics? Dull as ditchwater! If only they'd throw in some familiar phrases (like "dull as ditchwater") maybe i'd find RS easier, because I could relate to it, like I can relate to this poem!
As my last point, I would like to say that, at the start of lines 220, 221, 225, 229 ect., a grand total of 17 times in my extract, lines are started with the word "and". This would be to move the poem on at a very rapid pace when a person is reading it aloud, as you might to a child. The "ands" also serve as discourse markers, rather than simply just connectives because they are used so often, it's almost like saying "like" after everything you say, like. People in general tend to use discourse markers all the time in speach, which backs up my point of the informality of the poem. From line 246 through to 249, the "lame" boy's description is particularly full of these "ands", as the boy is presumably fondly remembering what the Piper told him and his "playmates" about what the reader could interpret to be heaven. The "ands" are also written here to show how often the boy has told his story, as the "ands" make it flow quickly.
Thursday, 4 October 2012
Three connections between three of Robert Browning's poems
My Last Duchess, Porphyria's Lover and The Laboratory.
The first is set in Ferrara, Italy and is a dramatic monologue about a Duke remembering his old wife who he had killed, the second is set in the eponimous lover's house and is a dramatic monologue about a Man killing his lover and the third is set in 17th century France and is a dramatic monologue about a woman killing her rival in love. See the main connection? All three of these poems are told as DRAMATIC MONOLOGUES (i'll get to the murders in paragraph two, OK, be patient). A dramatic monologue is a poem told exclusively by one character and all descriptions of scenery and other characters come from the mouth of that character. Writing poems in this form, Browning makes us readers try to sympathize with these thoroughly unpleasant characters. If told in second or third person, the main characters in these poems wouldn't have a hope in hell of getting any sympathy, but told in the first person like this, it takes you longer to see through their lies.
These particular three poems are also connected by the way in which they all center around a murder having been committed, being committed and yet to be committed. In My Last Duchess, the Duke has murdered his wife BEFORE the poem, in Porphyria's lover, Porphyria's lover murders her DURING the poem and in The Laboratory, the poisoner lady murders her rival AFTER the poem. So, even though all three poems concern killing, they all take it from a different place in the timeline. The preparation (The Laboratory), the act (Porphyria's lover) and the aftermath/dealing with conscience (My last Duchess). This devise, the crux on murder, succeeds in making each poem feel similar to the last, but not exactly the same.
My Last Duchess uses regular Iambic Pentameter ( tum TE tum TE tum TE tum TE tum TE).
The Laboratory uses it too.
Unfortunately, Porphyria's lover just had to ruin everything by having four beats per line (tum TE tum TE tum TE tum TE).
Iambic pentameter is the form that comes naturally to us, as it sounds the most natural and flowing. Robert Browning uses this form in My Last Duchess and The Laboratory to show us that the characters think what they're doing is perfectly normal. He uses four beats in Porphyria's lover to show us that the Lover is scared and not at all sure that what he has done (Murdered Porphyria) was right. He even has to reassure himself in line 42 "I am quite sure she felt no pain". He had just said words to that affect in line 41. This proves that, the Lover, unlike the Duke and the Poisoner felt remorse.
The first is set in Ferrara, Italy and is a dramatic monologue about a Duke remembering his old wife who he had killed, the second is set in the eponimous lover's house and is a dramatic monologue about a Man killing his lover and the third is set in 17th century France and is a dramatic monologue about a woman killing her rival in love. See the main connection? All three of these poems are told as DRAMATIC MONOLOGUES (i'll get to the murders in paragraph two, OK, be patient). A dramatic monologue is a poem told exclusively by one character and all descriptions of scenery and other characters come from the mouth of that character. Writing poems in this form, Browning makes us readers try to sympathize with these thoroughly unpleasant characters. If told in second or third person, the main characters in these poems wouldn't have a hope in hell of getting any sympathy, but told in the first person like this, it takes you longer to see through their lies.
These particular three poems are also connected by the way in which they all center around a murder having been committed, being committed and yet to be committed. In My Last Duchess, the Duke has murdered his wife BEFORE the poem, in Porphyria's lover, Porphyria's lover murders her DURING the poem and in The Laboratory, the poisoner lady murders her rival AFTER the poem. So, even though all three poems concern killing, they all take it from a different place in the timeline. The preparation (The Laboratory), the act (Porphyria's lover) and the aftermath/dealing with conscience (My last Duchess). This devise, the crux on murder, succeeds in making each poem feel similar to the last, but not exactly the same.
My Last Duchess uses regular Iambic Pentameter ( tum TE tum TE tum TE tum TE tum TE).
The Laboratory uses it too.
Unfortunately, Porphyria's lover just had to ruin everything by having four beats per line (tum TE tum TE tum TE tum TE).
Iambic pentameter is the form that comes naturally to us, as it sounds the most natural and flowing. Robert Browning uses this form in My Last Duchess and The Laboratory to show us that the characters think what they're doing is perfectly normal. He uses four beats in Porphyria's lover to show us that the Lover is scared and not at all sure that what he has done (Murdered Porphyria) was right. He even has to reassure himself in line 42 "I am quite sure she felt no pain". He had just said words to that affect in line 41. This proves that, the Lover, unlike the Duke and the Poisoner felt remorse.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)