Titus Andronicus Ru Jing

The play is set during the latter days of the Roman Empire and tells the fictional story of Titus, a general in the Roman army, who is engaged in a cycle of revenge with Tamora, Queen of the Goths. It is Shakespeare’s bloodiest and most violent work and traditionally was one of his least respected plays. Although it was extremely popular in its day, by the later seventeenth century it had fallen out of favor. In the Victorian era, it was disapproved of primarily because of what was considered to be a distasteful use of graphic violence, but from around the middle of the twentieth century its reputation began to improve.

In this drama, Tomara represents the evil and enmity. But no matter how, she is a mother. She was the queen of the Goths. After the failure of battle with Roma, she was captured by Titus and then became the later wife of Saturninus. The cruelest thing is that her son was killed and she could not do anything. Actually it is not difficult to think about the cruel inner heart of Tomara.

Both Tomara and Lavinia are the sacrifice of politics. They were not respected at all. The true identity of them are the “object”. Marriage became the only method for the women to earn some obedience, even not the respect.

No matter the time and background, there could be the same relationship of people, the love and revenge.

 

 

 

Shakespeare!! in China!!!! Ru Jing

It is amazing to see the drama of Shakespeare, A midsummer night’s dream performed by players of China. There are not so many differences between the drama of the West and the East. But the eastern players could add some different things to the drama. For example, the drama in China needs to correspond the taste of Chinese audience, so there are less old English words, like “thou” and some traditional English phrases, and some metaphors. In addition, there are a lot of interesting words, actions and music in the modern society.

In my presentation, I add a lot of new words and phrases that we can hear in our daily life. I got this aspiration from this drama. In the drama  A midsummer night’s dream, there are two different players for the role, Helena to present the difference before being loved and after that. And this comparison could strengthen the comparison of those two.

 

HOUSE OF CARDS AND RICHARD III

“House of Cards” is a Netlix television show which premiered in 2013. It has grown to be a popular television series, and will shortly begin its fourth season. The main character of the series is a man named Francis Underwood, played by Kevin Spacey.  Here our Richard is Frank Underwood, a Democratic House Majority Whip. He is living in a time of seeming goodwill and prosperity during the afterglow of a Presidential election that saw his guy get into power. And like Richard, who had no role to play in a “weak-piping time of peace,” such good times don’t suit Frank’s nature. The show turns on him being spurned by the President-elect and denied the promised post of Secretary of State, but it’s clear that he is a man in search of a slight, something that will spark his favored machinations of manipulation and revenge. Does this sound familiar? Frank speaks directly to the audience in theatrical asides, a device borrowed from “Richard III.” Angry and emasculated, Underwood looks us in the eye, swears revenge, and promises delicious and scandalous things to come if we stay tuned. He tells us, in effect, that he is “determined to prove a villain, / And hate the idle pleasures of these days.”

If it doesn’t sound crazy enough already, the main actor of the show has some experience with Shakespeare. I found the interesting fact that Kevin Spacey played Richard in modern dress at the Old Vic, in London, and at BAM, in Brooklyn, among other performance spaces around the world.Spacey brings a smiling and eager villain to both roles. He just has the look of Richard, and it is interesting that his character in “House of Cards” is just like Richard III.

Kevin Spacey playing Richard III

There will always be a villain like Richard II and Francis Underwood. People are always seeking to become a higher power in society, and they will do whatever it takes to get there. Francis Underwood is definitely a modern day Richard. He is going to do what he was promised and he does not care whose toes he steps on to get it.

Bill Shakespeare… For the Layman

There is a question in studying Shakespeare that may not ever be approached.  Shakespeare has always had a design flaw; only the most wealthy have been able to study and understand his works.  Whether it was the early English kings and nobleman or today’s college students, the principles behind truly learning Shakespeare have been left to those who could afford it.

The difficulties of seeing Shakespearean plays in the time period that they came out were obvious. The plays were more expensive than the layman could afford to attend and if you could get your hands on a copy of the manuscript, they lacked the perspective that one would get from watching it on stage.  For the working class there was also a lack of time because of long work days and lack of education.

The present day problems with truly studying Shakespeare are innumerable.  Everyone has access to a public education and most high school English teachers expose their students to Shakespeare in some form.  However, they are high school students and they lack the passion and desire that it takes to appreciate great works,  For anyone who teaches high school, they understand how few of the students actually want to be in their class and what a challenge it can be to make lessons fun.

Shakespeare on the college level poses the position that, while most people do attend some college, only those who have English based degree plans or can afford to take extra classes get the opportunity to study Shakespeare.  We run into this more elite aspect of society that is necessary for scholars.

Shakespeare has been available to the layman of modern society in ways that they are not even aware.  Through The Lion King, West Side Story, Deliver us From Eva (based on Taming of the Shrew) and an entourage of other films, Shakespeare has been delivered to the modern Joe.  They just don’t realize it.  There are so many people who analyze whether or not we should make Shakespeare more modern because it loses so much of the character dynamics and true meaning.  Which is more of a tragedy, to lose a little bit of meaning, or lose an entire audience?

Yet another Titus Andronicus post… This time involving South Park!

As I look through the assorted posts here the first thing that catches my attention can be described in just five words, “Gratuitous Violence and Dramatic Treachery”. I guess it doesn’t really matter what time frame or era we like to think we exist in as one thing remains the same for a great many people: drama, betrayal, and violence sells. Granted, probably not as much as sexual objectification, but still… This “relatively simple” idea is prevalent in just SO much of the multimedia that many of us consume on a daily basis, most especially in the television and movie industries, and is actually quite diverse. From a ridiculous amount of explosions (any Michael Bay movie ever) to gory slashers and thrillers (the Saw movie franchise for example) we see its many forms pretty much every where. And, oh boy, don’t even get me started on the amount of dramas that are watched, as well as read, that are filled with characters that we just love to hate. *Cough* Game of Thrones *Cough*!

Like I said though, the use of concepts that we would find abhorrent in our daily lives to entertain us is not a new phenomenon. Shakespeare, as well as many others I assume, knew of this and used it just as it is used today. Or, seemingly, very nearly at least. If you don’t believe me just look at Titus Andronicus. I mean, holy crap! Yes, it has other very valid points that could be said about it and Shakespearians have analysed the characters every way to Sunday for centuries, but I’m going to go out on a bit of a limb here and say that the one thing this play will be remembered for first and foremost is the many violent acts that are portrayed. Now, while I see most of these bigger acts as being on par with one another on my personal “Violence (That’s just not right!) Meter” the one I want to focus on is near the end of the play, when Titus feeds Tamora her own children in a pie.

For this post we were supposed to find and illustrate for all of you lovely readers out there how the ideas used in many of Shakespeare’s plays have been translated into the modern world. Well, I found cannibalism being used for the sake of humour. And it is only just now, as read through my last sentence, that I hear just how ridiculous that sounds. Just watch, you’ve been warned:

Pretty screwed up right? Yeah, I thought so too. Anyway, I guess my point is that one of the major factors for a play like Titus Andronicus is still widely used today and, in all honesty, I don’t think it’s going anywhere. And don’t get me wrong, while I’m nowhere near a fan of slashers and the like personally, I can’t say I’m immune to the pull of such things. After all, if I was I wouldn’t have found the episode that the above clip comes from. So in a lot of ways I’m just like many others, but I’m not here to preach that such things are inherently bad or some such just that this is a thing and that I don’t think it’s going anywhere.

If Shakespeare Were to Write Comics+Did you Know The Avengers is based on Shakespeare’s Troilus and Cressida?

[Actually, The Avengers isn’t based off of Troilus and Cressida, but hey, it got your attention, right?]

Has anyone ever compared Shakespeare with a comic strip? Let’s think about it for a minute—the two are almost completely opposite, right? William Shakespeare’s use of ornate language would not work well in a comic. Just imagine the scene in Titus Andronicus where Marcus goes on and on about Lavinia’s lost limbs. We discussed in class how the average American today would have no idea that Marcus is bewailing his niece’s misfortune. If someone has just lost their hands and tongue, we just don’t say:

Why dost not speak to me?

Alas, a crimson river of warm blood,

Like to a bubbling foundation stirred with wind,

Doth rise and fall between thy rosed lips,

Coming and going with thy honey breath. (II.iv.21-24)

At least, if someone just cut my tongue off, I am not expecting that kind of a response from anyone. Can you imagine a comic strip of that? I’d imagine a girl with what looks like a waterfall worthy to be the 8th of the 7 Wonders of the World just gushing from her mouth. There would also need to be roses around, beehives, and a river. I guess it could work, because Shakespeare and comics are both witty, full of puns, and often employ satire. Still, I’ve never seen a Shakespeare comic.

However, I have seen the Avengers and I’m assuming that many of you all have, too. Even if you haven’t seen the movie, you probably know the plot line. I know they just released the new one, but consider the first one for a moment. The simplified plot line goes like this: There is a problem. So, call in the superheroes because they are heroes with super powers.

If you think about it, Troilus and Cressida (T&C) is similar to this because basically it’s a bunch of superheroes fighting because there is a problem and they are super men. The men fighting in T&C and the men in the Avengers all come with character backgrounds that the audience already knows. Shakespeare’s audience would have known the stories of Hector, Achilles, Ulysses, Helen, Priam, Diomedes, Aeneas, and others. Likewise, contemporary audiences know the stories behind Captain America, Iron Man, Hulk, Thor, and the other major characters. Neither the writer of T&C or the directors of Avengers have to spend any time then on the back story of the characters, or explaining who they are. They come in as heroes and the audience have certain expectations for them.

I found that tAjax and Hulk were rather similar because both of them are big and strong and like to use their brute force when fighting. Ajax does a lot of punching; Hulk likes to smash. But, Achilles is also comparable to Hulk because at first, neither of those two characters want to fight. Hulk is hiding in Indonesia so that supposedly no one will find him. Black Widow does find him and she convinces him to join their cause. Similarly, Achilles does not want to fight, but after he is taunted and made jealous, he appears to fight.

Next time you look at comic strips, see if you can find similarities with Shakespeare’s writing. Let’s be honest, one the basic level, both are funny. Try going beyond that. Shakespeare is not “so five seconds ago.” He’s inspiration for things yet to come!

Titus

This movie was made in 1999 with the direct0r Julie Taymor. Actors such as Jessica Lange, Anthony Hopkins, Alan Cummings, and James Frain appear in this movie.

 

 

Synopsis: One of William Shakespeare’s lesser-known plays, Titus Andronicus was staged in New York by award-winning theatrical director Julie Taymor in an acclaimed 1995 production, before her widely praised Broadway version of The Lion King. Taymor revisits that production for her first motion picture, with the addition of a star-studded cast. Roman General Titus Andronicus (Anthony Hopkins) has returned from defeating the Goths in a bloody battle, but the victory has left him with mixed feelings, as the war took the lives of several of his sons. Titus is reminded by his first-born son Lucius (Angus Macfadyen) that their faith demands the sacrifice of an enemy prisoner as a gift to the gods for their victory. Titus chooses the eldest son of Tamora (Jessica Lange), the Queen of the Goths, who has since been taken hostage by Titus’s troops. Tamora pleads for her son’s life, but Titus goes ahead with the sacrifice. She then becomes the lover of the new emperor of Rome, Saturninus (Alan Cumming), a weak-willed and corrupt man. Tamora uses her connection to the throne for her own ends: in retaliation for the death of her son, Tamora and her surviving sons, Chiron (Jonathan Rhys Myers) and Demetrius (Matthew Rhys), brutally rape Titus’s beloved daughter, Lavinia (Laura Fraser). This act sets in motion an ever-tightening spiral of revenge and retaliation that leaves few of the participants unscathed. The supporting cast includes Colm Feore as Marcus, Harry Lennix as Aaron, and James Frain as Bassianus

Since Titus Andronicus is not a well known play I thought it was interesting that they did do an adaptation of it. With actors that are well known.

Richard III and Fisk

King Richard III was a very calculative and manipulative man. He knew what he wanted and always had a plan to get it. Sometimes those plans would change. Yet, he would overcome these changes and make it work until the end. In the show Daredevil there is a villain named Wilson Fisk. He is very smart, and calculating. Fisk’s goal is to be at the top of the food chain in his town (Hell’s Kitchen). He has an assistant that tends to do all of the dirty work for him so that he can hind in the shadows until it is necessary to reveal himself. Just like Richard, Fisk always has a plan and a backup plan. Richard does not use his own hands to kill people. Instead, he has someone else do it.  For the most part Fisk does the same thing. He does, however, kill a couple of people.

Richard was one of the last of his line, so the people that wrote about him made him out to be unappealing. Fisk is a major villain in Daredevil. The people who created the show made him look unappealing as well. He is large and walks funny. So there are some physical similarities between Fisk and Richard. There are also some status similarities. Such as the way that they both dress in well kept and pristine clothing. Not only does the clothing make them look sharp, it also makes them look ominous.

 

Both Richard and Fisk make it to the top, although only for a little while. They both must give speeches and plan how they are going to reveal themselves to others. They know what they want their images to be and they organize and or speak at events to show people they care, even if they do not.

A Little Blood Never Killed Anyone

http://sharpelvessociety.blogspot.com/2012/04/hunger-gamess-veiled-allusion-to.html

After reading Titus Andronicus, one might consider William Shakespeare to be cynical and twisted. However, the bloody dealings of Lavinia, Chiron, Demetrius, Mutius, Bassianus, Tamora, Titus, Aaron, and a few other minor characters were just a pleasant foreshadowing of the gore to be seen in today’s modern movies, television shows, video games, and literature. Little did Shakespeare know that he would start a popular trend in entertainment through his rather criticized play, Titus Andronicus.

The book trilogy, The Hunger Games, by Suzanne Collins contains faint references to Shakespeare’s character Lavinia from Titus Andronicus. Without former knowledge of one of Shakespeare’s most ridiculed and disliked plays, one might not be aware of Collins’ character reference. In her novel, Lavinia is an “Avox”, who works as a domestic servant for the main protagonist, Katniss. She is briefly mentioned in the novel as an Avox whose tongue is cut out for committing crimes against the Capitol. Though this might seem to be a small allusion to Shakespeare’s play, the entire Hunger Games Trilogy alludes to Titus Andronicus in its vengeful and death-filled plots.

Katniss and every other “tribute” from the twelve districts are forced to engage in an all-out bloody warfare in their fight for survival in the annual Hunger Games. Though Katniss and the other eleven tributes have no vengeful reasons to kill one another, they are forced to do so by President Snow, the leader of Panem. The violence in Titus Andronicus is not the only aspect found in the Hunger Games, however. Of course, the moral message that revenge only leads to the downfall of a society or king is also enlaced in this story.

But of course, the moral message is not what consumers are tantalized with. What do we want? Blood, and excessive amounts of it.

Movies like Saw, The Silence of the Lambs, The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, and Hostel all center on the grotesque murders of main and lesser characters. Television shows like CSI, Criminal Minds, The Following, Bates Motel, and The Walking Dead are all enlaced with the murder and capture of killers. Video games like Call of Duty, The Evil Dead, Zombies, Minecraft, and Resident Evil are all plagued with the fascination of blood and carnage. Of course, these are just some examples of popular entertainment in today’s current society.

So, what is with our obsessive fascination with blood that consumers of Shakespeare’s time did not approve? Perhaps, our lives are not exciting enough without the fabled stories of revenge and murder. Maybe, we as consumers can escape our orderly and unrequited lives by living vicariously through the avenged lives in movies, shows, and videos games. Or perhaps, Shakespeare was not so crazy after all, and he knew that a little blood never killed anyone.

Michonne: The Modernized Lavinia

Shakespeare’s play, Titus Andronicus, can be somewhat shocking if you started out reading other texts like Romeo and Juliet or The Taming of the Shrew. In my case, this was my experience. The title character, Titus, is truly weak in comparison to his praises of being a great soldier. Then there is the secret plotting of Tamora and Aaron. Within this play Shakespeare also brings up racial issues which is something else I didn’t expect.

Nevertheless, the most shocking part of it all, at least for me was when Tamora commands that her two sons Demetrius and Chiron have their way with Lavinia. Though it seems harsh enough that Shakespeare describes her as ravished, he also drops the detail that both her hands and tongue have been cut away. Realistically we may question how Lavinia survives the rest of the play, since obviously her blood loss is now a considerable concern. However, the first thing that came to my mind was The Walking Dead.

I’m not exactly a fan, but I’ve seen enough episodes to catch the drift. Strangely while reading Titus Andronicus I somehow made an association between Lavinia and Michonne. It seems that Michonne could truly be the Lavinia of our modern-day universe. Though Lavinia was a weak character simply because she was a women, Michonne is definitely not one to mess with. Although a gun in favorable in a world full of flesh-eating zombies Michonne relies on a sword which easily decapitates anything that may try to eat her.

In this alternative universe our modernized character instead cuts the hands and lower jaws of her victims, and this creatively keeps her safe among the walking dead. Similarly the removal of Lavinia’s hands and tongue kept Demetrius and Chiron safe, or at least prolonged their safety. Though this approach still didn’t stop Lavinia from communicating about her abusers, it certainly works quite nicely if you’re trying to survive the zombie apocalypse.