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.
Wednesday, 19 September 2012
Saturday, 15 September 2012
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.
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.
Sunday, 9 September 2012
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.
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.
Sunday, 5 August 2012
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.
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.
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!
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!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)