Commedia dell'Arte Characters

Your link no work sir. How disappointing, I had to navigate the world wide web all alone.

• Arlecchino was the most famous. He was an acrobat and a wit, childlike and amorous. He wore a cat–like mask and motley colored clothes and carried a bat or wooden sword.
• Brighella, Arlecchino's crony, was more roguish and sophisticated, a cowardly villain who would do anything for money.
• Il Capitano (the captain) was a caricature of the professional soldier—bold, swaggering, and cowardly.
• Il Dottore (the doctor) was a caricature of learning—pompous and fraudulent.
• Pantalone was a caricature of the Venetian merchant, rich and retired, mean and miserly, with a young wife or an adventurous daughter.
• Pedrolino was a white–faced, moon–struck dreamer and the forerunner of today's clown.
• Pulcinella, as seen in the English Punch and Judy shows, was a dwarfish humpback with a crooked nose, the cruel bachelor who chased pretty girls.
• Scarramuccia, dressed in black and carrying a pointed sword, was the Robin Hood of his day.
• The handsome Inamorato (the lover) went by many names. He wore no mask and had to be eloquent in order to speak the love declamations.
• The Inamorata was his female counterpart; Isabella Andreini was the most famous. Her servant, usually called Columbina, was the beloved of Harlequin. Witty, bright, and given to intrigue, she developed into such characters as Harlequine and Pierrette.
• La Ruffiana was an old woman, either the mother or a village gossip, who thwarted the lovers.
• Cantarina and Ballerina often took part in the comedy, but for the most part their job was to sing, dance, or play music.

There were many other minor characters, some of which were associated with a particular region of Italy such as Peppe Nappa (Sicily), Gianduia (Turin), Stenterello(Tuscany), Rugantino (Rome), and Meneghino (Milan).

'Male Gaze' Laura Mulvey

In her essay entitled 'Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema' Laura Mulvey put forward the concept of 'Male Gaze' to illustrate how the way Hollywood films were made oppressed women and thus promoted patriarchy. She argued that the way Hollywood films were made meant the audience identified with the male protagonist, with the female character simply there to be looked at, and the camera angles and viewpoint of the male characters perpetuated this. Mulvey identified three "looks" in film which serve to sexually objectify women;

• The first is the perspective of the male character on screen and how he perceives the female character.
• The second is the perspective of the spectator as they see the female character on screen. 
• The third is the male audience member's perspective of the male character in the film. This allows the male audience to view the female character as his own personal sex object because he can relate himself, through looking, to the male character in the film.

I think Mulvey's 'Male gaze' concept is evident in the Hollywood films of the 50's, 60's and 70's but has perhaps lessened as the Feminist movement has moved on. However I do think it's still relevant to film as protagonists are still mostly male and all big Hollywood films have beautiful women in them and the camera does tend to do a cheeky head to foot shot of them. Therefore the sexual objectification of women is still apparent in many films, but I think in a different way to the 'Golden Age' Hollywood movies with Marilyn Monroe etc. For example, the beautiful women in Hollywood movies these days tend not to be passive and to have an important role as well as "to be looked at". 

Bluebeard Plot Summary

Bluebeard is a French folktale written by Charles Perrault and first published in 1697. Bluebeard is a rich ugly aristocrat with a blue beard (no way) who has been married several times, however no one knows what has become of his previous wives and he is widely avoided by local girls. He visits a neighbour and wants one of his two daughters to marry him. They both initially refuse, but he eventually persuades the younger sister to marry him and she comes to live with him in his castle. He announces he has to go abroad and gives his new wife a bunch of keys to all the rooms in the castle, which contain his treasures, however he tells her not to use one key which unlocks a small room under the castle. She promises, so naturally she goes straight to this room as soon as he leaves and shock horror finds her husbands former wives hanging from hooks on the walls, she panics, drops the key in blood and then gets the hell out of there. She tells her sister, Anne, what's going on (as she's visiting) and plans to flee but Bluebeard comes home early. He sees the blood and knows his wife has broken her vow. He wants to behead her on the spot but lets her have a half hour to say her prayers with her sister. Mistake. Just as he's about to kill them, their two brothers arrive and kill Bluebeard. As he had no heirs, his new wife inherits his wealth and they all live happily ever after. The character of Bluebeard may have been based on a real aristocrat called Gilles de Retz, who was a self-confessed serial killer of children. Lovely.

On a completely unrelated note, I would like to thank Wikipedia for all their support over the years, how ever unreliable it may sometimes be. 

Vague Settings in Fairy Tales

I think there a few important reasons why vague settings are generally used in fairy tales.

• For one, the setting of "Once upon a time" or "far far away" helps the reader suspend their disbelief, they believe this is a tale which doesn't refer to any specific time or place and therefore may take place somewhere where talking animals, magic and princesses are the norm. Whereas if a fairy tale were to begin "Somewhere in Europe in the 1600's" then it would make it difficult for the reader to detach themselves from reality.
• Another reason why I believe fairy tales have vague settings is that this makes them universal to all cultures, time periods and morals. Fairy tales present us with a common ground of "a forest" or "a castle" and therefore whatever they aim to tell their audience cannot be narrowed down by cultural, historical or geographical boundaries, but can be applied to, and understood by, all. 
• However in the same way, vague settings may be used to highlight that fairy tales are not real and that the belief systems and morals expressed within them aren't supposed to be mimicked by the 'real world' as they are unique to that land "far far away". 

There you have it, why I think vague settings are used in fairy tales. 

Impressions of Frankenstein's Pursuit of the Monster...

Long time no blog.

Right so I have read from pages 160 to around 180, paying particular attention to Frankenstein's pursuit of the monster following it murdering Elizabeth on hers and Frankenstein's wedding night. An element of chase is apparently a common theme in Gothic texts, and typical of the Gothic protagonist's journey. Thus Frankenstein can be seen as a Gothic protagonist in this way, although prior to this in the novel, the reader finds themselves pitying the creature more. Indeed, Shelley appears to have presented the creature with the traits of a Gothic protagonist to a greater extent than Frankenstein, however these rapidly decline when the monster's rage takes over and he vows revenge on Frankenstein for destroying the female companion he promised to create for him.

Right so impressions of Frankenstein's pursuit of the monster/creature;

• Frankenstein becomes as obsessed with pursuing and destroying the monster as he was with creating it to begin with. In fact it's the only thing that he clings to life for, which seems ironic as this is exactly what the monster wants, to keep Frankenstein suffering for as long as possible, as this means he is in control. Whereas if Frankenstein were to give up and die then the monster would be powerless.
• The main thing I noticed about Frankenstein's pursuit of the monster is that he uses a lot of religious language to explain and describe it, referring to "Spirits" guiding him on his journey and keeping him alive so he can complete his purpose. He says the spirits give him "strength to fulfil my pilgrimage". The use of pilgrimage suggests that Frankenstein's pursuit of the monster could be seen as the pursuit of redemption for his blasphemous act of giving life to the creature in the first place. However this seems to contradict Frankenstein's own views and stray from the Gothic theme of corruption of religion. He also says "I pursued my path towards the destruction of the daemon, more as a task enjoyed by heaven, as the mechanical impulse of some power of which I was unconscious, than as the ardent desire of my soul"-again the use of heavily religious language, yet no mention of God directly is strange and could show Frankenstein's arrogance in that he sees himself as having a higher purpose. Whether that be creator or pilgrim whose mission it is to destroy the monster, who can be seen to represent the devil and sin, although he was made as a result of Frankenstein's own sinful actions. So there are definite religious connotations to the way in which Shelley has Frankenstein describe his pursuit of the monster, including his suffering but ongoing determination, helped by so-called "guiding spirits".
• To some extent the monster appears to have nature on his side in the pursuit, allowing him to constantly evade Frankenstein. This would be important, especially in light of the Romantic ideals so influential on Shelley at the time. For example nature seems to pose a threat to Frankenstein and is in a way the main component he has to face when pursuing the monster across the world, e.g. he has to battle the extreme cold of the north pole etc. "Rugged mountains of ice often barred my passage, and I often heard the thunder of the ground sea, which threatened my destruction" whereas the monster hides on a ship bound for the Black Sea for example, and Frankenstein sees this and climbs aboard, yet the creature escapes with Frankenstein admitting "I know not how". 

Impressions Of Walton...

Ok so we were told to blog on our impressions of Robert Walton, who is the sort of primary narrator for the story of Frankenstein, seeing as he recounts the story which he was told by Frankenstein.

Having read his first three letters I have many first impressions about Walton. He seems a very enthusiastic person, who is thirsty for knowledge and exploration. For example in his first letter he tells his sister how the his fortune has made his "day dreams become more fervent and vivid". He is obviously anticipating reaching his destination, as he is evidently on sea voyage. He displays quite a Romantic view to nature, with "the sun is for ever visible; its broad disk just skirting the horizon, and diffusing the perpetual splendour". He is quite elaborate in his descriptions, similar to Romantics writing near the time such as Coleridge. Indeed the 'Rime of the Ancient Mariner' is alluded to, and this Romantic view may have been a reflection of Shelley's husband's style of writing.
The writer's will for knowledge is also evident with "I may there discover the wondrous power which attracts the needle", it appears he is travelling to the North Pole. He has a clear goal and has a youthful excitement about him when he is talking of his adventures, e.g. "I feel my heart glow with an enthusiasm which elevates me to heaven". He also seems to have come from humble beginnings, for instance he shows he "My education was neglected yet I was passionately fond of reading", again showing his wish for information.

However, the writer also seems intimidated by the voyage that lies ahead, "heaven shower down blessings on you, and save me, that I may again testify my gratitude for all your love and kindness". At the end of his first three letters he always bids his sister farewell in case he should never see her again. The fact that such an apparently enthusiastic character even fears the voyage ahead of him shows a sense of foreboding.

In his second letter he seems less happy and talks of time going slowly and of the heavy "frost and snow" he also expresses his loneliness to his sister and he want for a friend. For example he feels he is too sophisticated in his ideas to befriend his fellow sailors and yet too uneducated, describing himself as "more illiterate than many school-boys of fifteen". He also confirms his Romantic outlook, declaring his "love for the marvelous".

His third letter is short and appears rushed, and hastily fills his sister in on his safety and to think of him and hope for the continuation of their good fortune.

So the writers appears intellectual, a Romantic, anxious to discover new things and he wants a mate...
Enter Frankenstein.  

5 Things I Learnt...

Here are the 5 things I learnt over the last 2 weeks.

1. Morality plays follow the fate of an individual in which the main character is supposed to represent all mankind. They're normally about saving your soul and avoiding temptation etc, but are less bible focused and try to engage the audience more.
2. Copernicus said the sun, not earth, was the centre of the universe. 
3. Friars were religious men who traveled. =P
4. Styx, Acheron and Phlegethon are all rivers of the underworld.
5. To put horns on a mans head was a Shakespearean insult which suggested the man's wife was sleeping around.

Can't wait to use all this in the exam!! Oh, wait.....

Faustus' Portrayal, Act 2 Scene 3

Helloooo. So in our last English Lit lesson we read through Act 2 Scene 3 of Doctor Faustus, which included some amazing reading by me as Pride. =P

I'm blogging about the portrayal of Faustus himself in this scene, for example is he supposed to be fearful and angry or happy and playful when the seven deadly sins are putting on a wee show for him. A will also talk about how his character develops further. 

 Firstly the scene starts with Faustus apparently intent on repenting to god and renouncing Mephistopheles. "When I behold the heavens, then I repent and curse thee, wicked Mephistopheles". Faustus seems to now understand the idea of hell being everywhere and he can't handle it. It is strange and ironic that he blames Mephistopheles, when in fact he was brutally honest with Faustus about hell and even seemed to be warning him. So Marlowe portrays Faustus as a very changeable character, one who is stubborn and fickle. It is strange for the audience to see such a change in him, as in his previous scene he willingly finalised his agreement to sell his soul to the devil, yet now the first thing he declares is a wish to repent. Faustus then stated "I will renounce this magic and repent", again this is completely contradictory as it was the wish to gain knowledge of magic that drove Faustus in the first place. 

By declaring this, Faustus seems to summon the Good and Bad Angel back onto stage and, contrary to what I said could be possible in a previous blog entry, he appears to be able to see and hear them. He even interacts with them. The Good Angel assures Faustus that he still can repent and "god will pity" him. Whereas  the Evil Angel says "thou art a spirit, god cannot pity thee". This is interesting as maybe the reason Faustus can hear the angels now is because he is a spirit and is therefore beyond repenting. Faustus himself says "Who buzzeth in mine ears I am a spirit?". Although Faustus expresses wish to repent, he can't help but take the advice of the Evil Angel. "My heart's so hardened I cannot repent", this could be to symbollise that hell is controlling his decisions now, forcibly stopping him from repenting. So he goes from wanting to repent to declaring he cannot. Indeed another factor that seems to pull Faustus back from this, is his curiosity and thirst for knowledge.

He then argues with Mephistopheles as he isn't answering his questions sufficiently, he is merely repeating what Faustus already knows. As a result, Faustus then wishes to repent again, almost just to spite Mephistopheles. This is despite having resolutely said he never would earlier on in the scene. He says "Christ, my saviour, seek to save distressed Faustus' soul". However it is not god that comes to Faustus, but Lucifer, Beelzebub and Mephistopheles. This could perhaps show that he is beyond help as it is Lucifer who answers him now. Faustus is scared and threatened and this causes him to vow allegiance to Lucifer and the agreement with Mephistopheles once more. "Faustus vows never to look to heaven, Never to name god or to pray to him" etc. So within this one scene, we really see Faustus' ever changing allegiance and how spineless he really is. He is almost like a child, having mood swings which dictate his behaviour.

Finally towards the latter half of the scene, when Faustus has grovelled for forgiveness to Lucifer, he is presented with the seven deadly sins, each of which talks to him. However this appears to be a mere distraction, as when he sold his soul in Act 2 Scene 1. For example after each sin has finished introducing themselves and their characteristics, Faustus simply says "What art thou, the second" etc and just moves onto the next. So this seems a pointless exercise as Faustus' thirst for knowledge isn't being catered to, which surely would be more appropriate in order to really distract him. It is unclear, however whether Faustus is happy or angry throughout this parade. He says to Envy, "Away envious rascal!", which could be playful or serious. The nature of his reaction could be changed according to the production on stage, and therefore alter the mood of the scene. For example is Faustus reluctantly obeying Lucifer out of fear and does he really look down upon these creatures of hell? Or is he being playful with the sins as it were, and this would further show how he is so fickle in his beliefs? The comic feeling of this parade of sins could be to make light of the situation of to distract the audience and indeed Faustus himself, from the situation he has landed himself in. I personally believe Faustus is supposed to be being playful with the sins, and almost mocking them, e.g. "I'll see thee hanged." I think this is more appropriate as it emphasises the cowardly nature of his character and how he is one minute determined to repent to save his soul and the next he is none the wiser and declaring "O, might I see hell and return again, how happy were I then!". Marlowe may have been making another message about religion here, about how people's beliefs are so changeable according to the circumstance and what they stand to gain.

Cool, so in this scene Faustus is portrayed as completely fickle and pathetic really, and he is distracted easily by Lucifer, perhaps showing again that despite what he does it is hell who controls him now, even if he wants to repent he won't be able to as hell will stop him. I also think he is supposed to be reacting merrily to the seven deadly sins, as this would highlight his changeability even more, and I doubt he would be rude and aggressive to something Lucifer has sent, as he is all-powerful in terms of what happens to Faustus.

Fertig. 

Comedy In Faustus

In our last English lesson we looked at Act 1 Scene 4 of Dr Faustus. This scene is a comic scene slap-bang in the middle of the rather more serious business of Faustus selling his soul to the devil Mephistopheles. We looked at what we ourselves defined as comedy and then read the scene. In the scene, which comes directly after Faustus has first met Mephistopheles, the character Wagner is trying to convince a new character called Robin, who is a clown, to commit to his service. So the situation between Wagner and Robin is similar with that of Faustus gaining Mephistopheles' service in return for giving his soul to him. However this scene is supposed to be funny, indeed the fact that straight away Robin is called a clown shows the audience that he is meant to be seen as comical. The two have a bit of a comical debate which includes many a play on words and to be honest my sides were splitting by the end of it. OK sarcasm is sweet. =P

Anyway so we tried to think of ideas as to why this scene has been included where it has, or at all. As I have mentioned it takes place between two very serious scenes which are crucial to the play, and it doesn't fit in. Faustus has just met Mephistopheles when this scene takes place and in the scene that succeeds it he actually  confirms the deal to sell his soul to the devil.
One reason why this scene could be here is simply to relieve tension in the audience, although I believe this to be a relatively weak interpretation. However when talking about comedy we said it can often relieve tension and make us feel relaxed, so Marlowe could have put this scene in to make the audience re-engage with the performance after a scene that would have created tension over it's controversial religious context.
However I think a stronger interpretation of this scene is that it is supposed to act as a parallel to the situation Faustus is in, and therefore help to almost mock Faustus. For example, the clown Robin, a comical and seemingly uneducated character makes the sensible decision to refuse Wagner's offer and not commit to being his servant. This sets the way for a comparison with Faustus as in the next scene he makes his fateful decision. So by presenting Robin in this way Marlowe makes Faustus out to be even more of a fool, as despite all his arrogance and intelligence he isn't as sensible as a mere clown who is of no where near the same academic standing that Faustus is.

So yeah there's just a few thoughts about Act 1 Scene 4, I can't go into too much detail about why the scene is there because to be honest I'm not sure. For example the strongest I could think of was to expose how a clown is seemingly more sensible than Faustus, however this doesn't really fit with the points I thought Marlowe was trying to get across in previous scenes. Though I suppose he could be showing a different side and exploiting how those who are academic are listened to straight away when in reality they sometimes lack common sense. This could relate to how the common people of the time would accept everything the clergy etc told them as they were considered intellectuals.

Eh Up, Isn't There Only Meant To Be One Devil??

It was rumoured that during some performances of Dr Faustus in the late 16th Century, an extra devil was seen on stage alongside Mephistopheles (the character). Members of the audience claimed they saw this extra devil, which caused panic and fear in both actors and audiences. The play became infamous for this, and according to so-called legend the 'extra devil' was seen on several occasions. Many people even thought the play was cursed or evil. Although the extra devil rumours frightened many, it was good for Marlowe as it increased the play's popularity in that more people went to see it, despite their religious fears at the time.

Passion Plays

Passion plays have their origin in the Easter story and are dramatic presentations depicting the so-called passion of Jesus. So they show the trial, suffering and death of Jesus. Cheery ey? Passion plays are a traditional part of Lent in some Christian denominations, particularly Catholicism. 

They have been taking place since the 13th Century, and reached the height of their popularity in the 15th Century, when they were also performed in public squares with up to 200 actors from different social classes. They became increasingly more secular however, and started to add a lot more humour alongside the serious thought. By the16th Century due to circumstances at the time such as the Reformation which banned such dramatic representations of Christ, the plays were abolished. The plays were revived in the 19th         century and are now performed all over the world.

Symbolism On Stage

In our last lesson we looked at how the staging of a play can change the meaning of what's taking place on stage, and in this post I'm just going to outline some examples relating to Doctor Faustus and explain how I would stage a part of the play.

So, where characters are placed, what they're wearing, and any props they may be holding can symbolise something about their character to the audience or capture the audience's imagination. For example, in plays when a new character comes on stage it often says enter "above". This could be literal obviously, such as they are entering onto a balcony etc. However it could also show the high status of a character or their importance in the scene. In the same way, if there is some sort of platform on stage, this could mean that those who enter "above" are supposed to be separate/different from the others on stage. So they could be the spirit of a character for example, who is looking back at events and is invisible to the others. Like in Billy Elliot when his mother's character is often at the back of the stage watching him etc.
Secondly costumes can show status and wealth, and would, at the time in which Doctor Faustus was first performed, have been donated by aristocrats. Props on the other hand can perhaps most usefully show the audience what is happening in the story, for example if a character is holding a dagger then it's evident to the audience that the situation in dangerous or that violence has taken place. The example we thought of in class was if a character has a bloody tissue, as it sets the audience's imagination running, which means the actors don't have to spell what has happened out to the audience, as they are free to interpret the staging etc as they wish.

All of this would have been particularly crucial to a performance at the time of Marlowe as the stages were often bare, meaning the audience would take a lot from how the characters on stage were dressed and positioned. For example in class we looked at some more of Act 1.1 in which the good and bad angel appear and talk to Faustus. We were then asked to do a drawing of how we would stage this scene and why. I said that I would have the two angels on raised platforms either side of the stage, and I personally think that Faustus can neither see nor hear them. For example after they have spoken to him to try and convince him as to what he should do next, he appears to completely ignore them. So I would have it as if the angels are looking back at what has happened to Faustus and advising him, although they know his fate. Sort of like in a Christmas Carol with the ghost of Christmas past etc.

Anyhoo, that's me done. Roll on Friday's lesson.

What Does The Audience Think Now?

This audience seem slightly two-faced if you ask me, but this is arguably down to the way Marlowe chooses to present Faustus to them.

I recently blogged on the what the audience was, in my opinion, supposed to think of Faustus after the chorus' introduction of him. I said they are supposed to reserve their judgement of Faustus as the chorus say "to patient judgements we appeal our plaud". They are, however inevitably weary of Faustus' character, due to the nature of his crime and the highly religious context in which the play is set. However Marlowe aims to counter this by suggesting it wasn't entirely Faustus' fault that he did what he did. From the chorus they also see that Faustus is an intelligent man. So the audience are supposed to think Faustus did terribly wrong, but that the crimes he committed were not necessarily his fault so therefore they should reserve their judgement.

Last lesson we went through the first part of act 1 and re-assessed what the audience's opinion might be now. In this section of act 1 Faustus is alone on stage, in his study contemplating which subject he should study next. One thing which I think doesn't change is that the audience still view Faustus as a very intelligent man, for example his first line is "settle thy studies Faustus". This illustrates his intelligence as he is having to debate what to study, suggesting he has the brains to study anything and everything. The fact that he refers to himself in the third person could also show he has a rational mind, as he is trying to reach a reasoned judgement without becoming emotionally involved. However through this I think the audience may also be feeling that Faustus is arrogant and has an air of self-importance about him. He is nevertheless an intelligent and well-educated character as he reads and understands Latin for example, and in this sense I think act 1's introduction of Faustus follows on from the chorus' introduction of him.
This is, however the only point on which the audience's opinion isn't likely to have changed. I personally think they will now find it near impossible to reserve judgement and feel sympathy for Faustus, as he appears arrogant, selfish, power-hungry and blasphemous.

For example, Faustus rejects four highly esteemed subjects of study, claiming he is better than them and that he has already "attained the end" of them. He first rejects philosophy, saying "a greater subject fitteth Faustus' wit". Then he turns to medicine and rejects it as he feels he has already saved people's lives and that he is highly respected anyway, "Are not thy bills hung up as monuments?". The first thing he mentions about medicine is the opportunity to "Heap up gold and be eternized for some wondrous cure", this shows aspects of Faustus' ambition. He wants to be eternally remembered, thus showing his selfish attitude towards these many professions. He only wishes to study something that will bring him prestige, so in this case he would only be interested in finding a cure to a disease, not to save people, but so that he would be remembered forever. He then moves on to law, which he dismisses as "paltry legacies" and which he believes is "too servile and illiberal" for him. The audience see Faustus' attraction to freedom as selfish as he only wishes his studies to benefit himself and not others. Finally Faustus causes the audience's estimations of his character to really fall by dismissing the study of divinity. He seems to have a narrow understanding of religion, especially for a man who has supposedly "profited in divinity" and the audience may pick up on this and feel sorry for Faustus. However I think a stronger argument would be that the audience resent Faustus more still as he is dismisses everything which an average person of the time is likely to have held dear. Faustus states that you cannot escape sin and therefore death either way by studying divinity and so he cries "Divinity adieu!".

The audience find it particularly hard to sympathise with Faustus due to his blatant misunderstanding of their concept of religion and his blasphemous ambitions. For one he seems to laugh at religion, reading a quote aloud and laughing, "Ha!" which the audience would no-doubt find offensive. However it is in Faustus' ambition that the audience see his blasphemous tendencies and wishes to become apparently on par with god. He says "Yet thou art Faustus, and a man" and talks of his wish to have the power to raise people from the dead or give them eternal life. He therefore appears to want to be more than a man and have powers only god has, that is to grant life to others. Faustus sees limits even in the highest achievements of men, stating that although emperors and kings are "obeyed in their several provinces" even they cannot "raise the wind or rend the clouds".
When Faustus has rejected all the other professions including divinity, he adds injury to insult by picking up a book of magic and stating "necromantic books are heavenly" and that this is what he "most desires". It is the unknown nature of magic which Faustus is drawn to, but this doesn't gain the audience's approval as they think this "devilish" subject should remain unknown as it challenges god. Indeed Faustus wants to be like god, saying he desires "omnipotence" and to control " All things that move between the quiet poles", basically he wants to be all powerful and control the world, which wouldn't help the audience in reserving their judgment as they see this as possibly the most serious sin. Faustus then ends with "try thy brains to become a deity", he wants to become a god. So the audience cannot feel sympathy for Faustus due to his blatant blasphemy, selfishness and power obsession. Plus it seems unlikely, as the chorus warned, that the "heavens conspired his overthrow" as so far we have the impression that he is very arrogant and the type of person who would readily make deals with the devil anyway.

In a way, I think that although the chorus encourages the audience to sympathise with the character of Faustus, they are set up to do the opposite. For example by warning them that they should reserve their judgement, Marlowe prepares the audience to judge him arguably more harshly as they are looking for reasons why they shouldn't reserve their judgement, and act 1 provides them with many. I would argue that in doing this, Marlowe knew that the audience would never really empathise with Faustus and that he was aiming to make a point. For example the audience's opinion is so heavily influenced by their religious beliefs, that they cannot help but judge Faustus negatively, and Marlowe could be playing on this to show his dilemma. He can never create a respected and reasonable character that challenges religion, so therefore he adheres to the stereotype to illustrate the influence that religion has in society.

So, there we have it. I think the audience is now supposed to/does see Faustus' character as arrogant, self important, selfish, power obsessed and most importantly blasphemous. Their judgement is no longer being reserved, nor do they entertain the idea that the heavens, aka god, had a part to play in his downfall.

Cool. Elvis has left the building.

Why Was There Tension Between Catholics And Protestants In Elizabethan England?

Religions? Fighting with each other?! Utterly shocking, This is unheard of.

Basically, Elizabeth was Protestant and religion was very influential. The main tension between Catholics and Protestants had started with the Henrican Reformation and over the conflicting beliefs of the two groups. For example, Protestants reject the Pope, reject the Church and priests to act as a medium between people and god and say that salvation can only come from a close personal relationship with god through reading the Bible etc. Catholics ain't a fan of this, they love the Pope and a wee bit of salvation through confessions etc.

What Is The Audience Supposed To Think Of Faustus?

We started to answer this question in class, after reading the prologue of Doctor Faustus, in which the chorus provide us with the basis of the play and therefore our first impressions of Faustus' character.

So what is the audience supposed to think?

I think the audience is supposed to reserve their judgement of Faustus and to perhaps empathise with him. For example the audience are told by the chorus, "to patient judgements we appeal our plaud", so the audience are told to be open-minded and that if they wait to judge Faustus it will perhaps be beneficial to them. This is all despite the fact that they are told Faustus engaged in "Devilish exercise" and sells his soul to the devil. The audience are helped by Marlowe to appreciate Faustus more as the chorus takes them through his upbringing. "Now is he born...In Germany" etc. The use of the present tense "Now" draws the audience in and gives them a shared experience or even bond with Faustus, which I think is supposed to create sympathy and help them reserve judgement on his "Devilish" deeds. 

The reason the audience needs persuading to be more open-minded in their judgement of Faustus is because they are told what he did, which was to sell his soul to the devil, which at the time was arguably the worst mortal sin that could possibly be committed. On top of this the audience are told he conversed with the dead, "cursed necromancy" and that nothing was as "sweet as magic is to him", which were controversial interests to say the least for an audience in the Sixteenth Century. So he excelled in "heavenly matters of Theology" yet he committed this sinful deed and interfered with magic. Yet Marlowe seems to suggest through the nature of the chorus' introduction, that Faustus deserves their patience. 

Furthermore, Marlowe suggests that what happens to Faustus was not necessarily his fault. He talks of how the "heavens conspired his overthrow", this is again a strange moral view to adopt, to suggest that the heavens, i.e god was the reason for his downfall. Considering Marlowe's own atheistic tendencies, one could infer that he was making a statement here about free will and perhaps even criticising religion. He does this subtly enough, however so as to still to appeal to the audience, as outright criticism of the Church at the time was unthinkable heresy. 

So the audience are supposed to sympathise with Faustus and take into consideration the limited control he may of had in what he did. Also the audience are not told what actually happens to Faustus in the end, thus removing the inevitability of his downfall and perhaps leaving them time and scope to reserve their judgement, For if they were told that Faustus is dragged into hell, they would immediately judge him as an evil sinner who was punished for what he did, but leaving it open, "Faustus' fortunes, good or bad" means they are unsure what to think. For example if it turns out that Faustus is forgiven by god for what he did, then the audience's opinion would mirror this.

In addition, the audience are supposed to think that Faustus is a very intelligent man, but that this may have been a contributing factor in his "overthrow". For example we are told he was "graced with doctor's name", showing him to be of great intelligence and to have earned a higher status for himself. However he was "swoll'n with cunning of a self-conceit", his intelligence may have gone to his head and he seems to have become proud, a typical trait of a gothic protagonist. 

Fertig.

Frankenstein (Blog 3)

FINAL ENGLISH BLOG OF THE SUMMER.

Check me out, only two weeks in, yeah boiiiii!!

Anyways I have finished Frankenstein all in one day! My my I am sad. Oh well. I really enjoyed it actually, like I mentioned before I like to have extra detail and the text obviously provided that as I had only ever seen film adaptations before. I liked the part where Frankenstein came to Britain with Henry and the monster kills him in Ireland. (where the reception is very unwelcoming =P). I didn't even realise that Henry was one of the victims of the Monster. I also liked the narrative frame of the sailor being told this story by Frankenstein. It's almost like 'Rime of the Ancient Mariner', but without the whole being crap part =D. And with a monster.

So overall I enjoyed Frankenstein because it's retro but easy to read and is all together a good story. Except for the whole 'I'm your cousin/sister/lover thing'. Not a fan of that. Frankenstein is just a classic Gothic story and I think it's definitely the text which I can see stand-out elements of the Gothic in, compared to Faustus and the Bloody Chamber.
All in all Frankenstein is most enjoyable, Bloody Chamber the most interesting and outright weird and finally Faustus is the most.....ok. =D

Over and out.

Frankenstein (Blog 2)

Helloo again. So this text is 191 pages long and I have just finished reading page 103ish. I am enjoying the story so far and was surprised at how little the monster's creation is emphasised in comparison to all the film adaptations. For example in the films you see the monster a lot, but in the novel it's slightly different. I also thought Frankenstein's brother William was killed a lot sooner than I expected, but I think I preferred it as it re-introduced the monster into Frankenstein's life in a really scary and tense way.

At the moment the narrative has changed hands into the Monster and he is telling the tale of his life since Frankenstein abandoned him and he ran away. I am enjoying this extra detail about what the monster has been doing and the story of the family he is living near and observing. For example I was never aware of the story of the man Felix and his Turkish bride before, and so am enjoying this extra dimension to the story.

Not much to say really as I am not going to recount the story in this blog as that would just be pointless. Basically I think I'm almost at the bit where the monster is going to ask Frankenstein to create him a female companion.

Cool. Onward with the Frankenstein.

Frankenstein (Blog 1)

Helloooo.
So I have just finished reading the very beginning of Mary Shelley's 'Frankenstein'. I obviously know the story well and we recently watched the film adaptation with Helena Bonham Carter and good old Kenneth Brannagh. By the way, did you see Kenneth at the Olympic opening ceremony? He was brilliantly dramatic as always!!

Anyway so for this text I kind of know what to expect in terms of the story line. I have got up to page 18 which is sort of the introduction to the story. A sailor writes letters home to his sister in which he tells her of his travels and how they found this European fellow floating in the ice near their boat. They nurse him back to health and the sailor becomes friends with him. The sailor then writes to his sister about how this strange man has a story he wants to tell him, and the sailor then relays it to his sister via letter. So this first section sets the  narrative frame for Frankenstein (who I have deduced is the European dude =P) to tell his story. Indeed the text then says 'Chapter I' and the story begins in first person with Frankenstein as the narrator.
I am looking forward to reading this book as I do like the story and it's pretty easy to understand all the way through. I also enjoy extra detail that obviously cannot be included in a film version. So the real message here is always read the book! ----and I am obviously really talking about the Harry Potter books =D.

Auf Wiedersehen!

Doctor Faustus (Blog 4)

Right so I have just finished reading the B-Text version of Faustus, which is pretty much the same just with added scenes and dialogue and a few slight changes which don't impact on the main plot at all.
I said in my previous blog that I might make a "cheeky comparison" between the two texts but I can't think of anything of real merit to compare so that's not going to happen. =D

To my great surprise I actually preferred this version, despite it's longer length, as I felt I understood what was going on more. This may have been due to the extra scenes providing more information, or I may have just been paying more attention this time! I particularly benefited from the extra scene with the Pope and the Emperor as I feel in sort of understand what they're doing there now.  =P. I also realised there were notes in the back of the book, which correspond to certain lines etc. Although they weren't of great help, they were useful when facing "Bloody Shakespeare" type language barriers! =D Hahaaa.

So yeah that's Faustus.

Doctor Faustus (Blog 3)

I have finished reading the Text-A play of Doctor Faustus! I don't really get everything that happened but in the end I did find the language easier to understand than "bloody Shakespeare" as I so-named him in my first blog on this play. Also I liked the length of it! Can easily be read in one sitting, an hour and a half or something.

Faustus visits the H.R.E in act four, who has heard of Faustus' powers and wants to make Alexander the Great appear before him in return for money I think, or a "bounteous reward". Faustus tricks some Horse-courser to buy this horse from him but it turns out it wasn't really a horse at all, just a bottle of hay transformed into a horse. Confusing yet again. Then some Duke and Duchess want some grapes so Faustus gets Mephistopheles to go and get some from like India or somewhere, then Faustus wants to see Helen of Greece brought back and so Mephistopheles does this and Faustus kisses her. Completely confused.

Finally Faustus gets cold feet yet again and goes to his three scholar friends and admits what he did. He has given his soul to the Devil and now it's time for him to be taken to hell. So in the end Faustus can't repent as it's too late, so Mephistopheles, Lucifer and other Devils drag him to hell. Joyful.

So yeah that's it. Overall I didn't dislike it and it wasn't that hard to read. I obviously got the main idea of what was going on but may have missed some rather crucial points in some of the longer paragraphs of dialogue which were harder to understand. 

As far as morals of the story are concerned it seems to me to be a play all about morality itself and what is right and wrong. Also how the Human Race is accountable for it's actions and has to pay the price. In this play it's done through this idea of religious morality and denying you creator just for your own greed and knowledge. So obviously it relates to the Gothic here with the idea of corruption of religion. It also has similarities with Frankenstein (which we're also studying) as the protagonist is going against God due to their greed for knowledge and power. However what Faustus does is arguably worse as he actually goes to the other side and makes deals with the Devil, whereas Frankenstein is only guilty of playing God, not outright going against him. 

Anyhoo I will read the B-Text as well, which I gather is pretty much the same, just with added material and a few changes. It is also, sadly, longer in length. =). I won't write three blogs on that as well, maybe just one to sum up what's different and what I thought about it, maybe a cheeky little comparison as well. =D