While there is some belief among the audience that Ariel admires Prospero, it seems to be that their compliance is in response to fearing repeating past mistakes and being locked up for resisting their new master. The idea that Ariel is scared of rejecting a request by their master makes every action they perform in this play more uncomfortable, as we don't actually know how they morally feel about these actions.

Gonzalo's idea of what would be the perfect society seems very reminiscent of Thomas Jefferson's Agrarian model, in which the country is controlled by many small, independent farmers. There is an emphasis on the lack of a strong, centralized government and Gonzalo seems to support this idea. However, just like Gonzalo's idea, the Agrarian model is not particularly stable long term, with many other characters pointing out its flaws.

It is interesting to note in Gonzalo's idealized society that women are specifically described as being "innocent and pure" with that stressed on them over the men. The innocence and purity of women in these stories is often spoken of as the God-intended version of how they should act, though women are compelled by their own nature to act impurely.

The interesting part about the exchange between Miranda and Ferdinand in this scene is that this essentially goes over the promises made during a wedding ceremony. However, a thing to note is that Miranda and Ferdinand have effectively switched their vows, with Ferdinand stating he will serve Miranda while Miranda states she will only be with Ferdinand, something that is traditionally proclaimed by the man.

Similarly to Much Ado, here Prospero compares love to a sort of disease, a physical ailment that the character is suffering from. While this paints love to be a negative thing, it also encapsulates that chaotic feelings that emerge from being in love. It also speaks to how much people at this time thought your body was tied to your emotions, such as the idea that you could die from a broken heart.

This brings up the idea of marriage as a prize at the end of the story, signifying a happy ending and the return of order. The latter fits with Prospero's return to power, Alonso has been reunited with his son, and the ship has been revealed. To cement this with the audience, Ferdinand and Miranda are now being married as another way to return order after all the chaos of the story, much like Midsummer Night's.

This moment felt like the end of Midsummer Night's, everything wrapped up very suddenly with the story and Prospero, despite his extremely elaborate plan, quickly overcame his grudges. Prospero just suddenly forgives his brother. The ending of this play reflects the stories that Shakespeare was often inspired by, have a very neat, happy(?) ending like a folktale.

Prospero is openly othering Ariel in this moment by not being a human, but rather a spirit. This is used by Prospero to say that Ariel does not experience empathy as Prospero does and is not capable of it. Such expressions dehumanize Ariel and tie into the idea that people who are othered are treated as less human than the dominating group.

As Stephano and Trinculo are suppose to represent the rustics of this story, I wonder if potentially meant as a satire of the obsession that the upper class has with material objects. Stephano and Trinculo are so distracted by these noble clothes that they fail in killing Prospero, foiling their chances of ruling the island.

Again we see the idolization of the European characters by non-European characters. Under the ranks/classes of each character, it seems characters like Caliban are aware of the in-universe concept that they are considered inferior to these Europeans, as Caliban equates meeting them to meeting gods.

This is a line that is reminiscent of abuse. Prospero is attempting to downplay the control he has over Ariel, though Ariel expresses he wants to be free. Prospero argues that even though Ariel is not free, he should not be complaining because he is not as bad as Ariel's previous master. He is effectively shirking off any criticism that Ariel has by claiming that because is not as bad as the witch, Prospero is automatically good.

This is a moment in which we again see Shakespeare playing into developing fears that would soon become longstanding prejudices. The play acts out the fear of a non-European man taking advantage of a white woman and, through this, corrupting the inherent purity and innocence of her.

This is perhaps indicating Antonio's character, as while Gonzalo is giving genuinely good advice for their situation, Antonio refuses to listen to him and instead mocks him. As a leader, this could mean he is not willing to listen to others' opinions.

This ties back to earlier when they state it is better to cry when you are happy than laugh when you are sad. This is perhaps because crying is a very powerful emotion and it's better to be so happy you begin crying, while laughing when you are sad is more of a repression of emotions. Miranda is so expressive that she is moved to tears by her happiness.

Stephano's continued decision to refer to Caliban as "monster" as opposed to his name shows a continued dehumanization of his character, as your name is tied strongly with your identity, so by calling him "Monster" as opposed to his name, you are stripping him of his identity.

Unlike the animalistic descriptions of Caliban, Ariel is almost infantilized by Prospero, with Ariel seemingly desperate for Prospero's approval, similarly to the idolization present in Caliban to Stephano. Both, under the model of colonization, have admiration of European characters and put them in this godlike position in comparison to them.

As we discussed in class, this is another instance of Prospero "creating" a powerful illusion, when it is actually imprisoned spirits doing his bidding for him. Like in colonialism, these spirits who were from the island are being controlled by this European who came on their island, told them to do work for him and serve him by using power over them, before taking credit for all the work that they've done.

This is a moment where the comparison between Love and love is made, with Ferdinand arguing that the power of Love being stronger than love, with Ferdinand caring enough about Miranda to abstain from having sex with her until it is socially appropriate. Prospero seems to hold a more cynical view than this, possibly suggesting that as a character and due to his experiences he does not have much faith in the good of people.

Referring to Prospero giving Ferdinand his daughter as giving him one third of his life is actually a really clever way to express having a child. Someone puts so much effort, so much of their own life into raising a child that they become an extension or a piece of your own life. This phrasing from Prospero suggests just how much he cares about his daughter, with her existence taking up a third of his own life.

Through the use of harpies, we can see a reference to the classics appearing again in Shakespeare's works. Harpies were creatures of Greek myth who were said, among other things, to take away evil people as punishment. This is something that not only would the men in the play fear, but the audience would be aware of what Ariel was impersonating and what a harpy signified.

This touches on a relevant issue in that people often resist giving money to those in need whether saying "I don't have any cash" or just ignoring them, but then spend money liberally on trivial things that are just for a cheap thrill. We value money but don't always consider the selfish ways we use it.

This line from Ferdinand sounds like an earlier iteration of the "not like other girls" line. He is stating that she is desirable because she's not like any woman he has ever met before. This also puts her in the Woman in White trope, as Ferdinand finds Miranda desirable because she doesn't have "some defect" like other women he has been with, placing her on this pedestal of perfection.

This line by Stephano brings with it the implication, as he is looking at Caliban while saying this, that Caliban has a darker complexion, whether being non-white or because he is out in the sun on the island. Regardless, this parallels the reading from Monsters and Cannibals we read, as Sebastian compares people from the Indies to being devils, describing Caliban as being monstrous due to him being a "savage."

Sebastian displays the prejudice beginning at the time against non-Europeans. Alonso's daughter is apparently lost because she was sent to marry someone from Africa, with Sebastian believing that this is perhaps a divine punishment for doing so. This reinforces the belief that God made people who are inherently better than others and that sending his daughter to be married to non-Europeans is a sinful act to be punished.

The idea that Prospero's achievement in the storm was not his own, but rather a sort of servant fits with many class ideas of the time. The backbone that does all of the work is the servant, while the person in the position of power takes credit for this work, stating it as not only their idea but their execution.

Many of Shakespeare's plays have this sort of foreshadowing/dramatic irony that allows the audience to see how things are being set up, likely to make them feel more included as well as help them remember what is going on between breaks.

Prospero's complaint reminds me of King Lear's, in which he wants to maintain his position without doing the work that is required of it. As we discussed in class, the nature of a king's relationship with his people is through the work that provides as king he earns love and devotion. This feels like the complaints that Goneril and Regan had with Lear, which were seemingly reasonable at the time.

This seems to parallel the attitude held about Cassio in Othello, in which Iago believed that due to his bookish nature, Cassio was unfit for his position of power. I wonder if this speaks to Shakespeare's idea of the importance of being well-educated or if it reflecting the ideas of manhood: that man should be more about his actions.

Again the discussion of having a legitimate child, the concept of cuckolding, and the virtue of a woman are being brought up, something that seems to be a theme in Shakespeare's plays. Because of Miranda's mother's reputation of purity, Prospero believes that Miranda is his, though the phrasing of this line suggests some doubt.

Knowing that Miranda is meant to be married at the end of this play, coming to the realization that she is currently between 14-15 years old reminds me of the societal differences compared to modern day. While in the past being married at such an age was normal, now I am only aware of how horrifying it would be to imagine being married at such an age. This does change her naivety from being a show a virtue in a woman to child-like innocence, which is a little sketchy.

Miranda officially painted herself as another Woman in White in this line. She demonstrates herself as being both naive, in her lack of knowledge of the world, and docile, in her decision to not ask too many questions about it, potentially because she found it improper to do so. Both of these trades will add to her being found desirable by men.

This line is a moment in the play that potentially contradicts the existence of fate. While Gonzalo states that they will die because it is destined, we know as the reader that they will survive this encounter, nullifying this. However, it could also be argued that they were destined to survive and Gonzalo's prediction was simply wrong.

Interestingly, we see Gonzalo perhaps taking comfort in class order, enjoying the idea that someone of lower class like the Boatswain is destined to be hanged. This could also be an early iteration of the belief that those of a lower income/class are often associated more with criminal activity. Based on his "complexion", either referring to his skin tone or his character, Gonzalo sees him to be a criminal.

This line by Leonato, stating that crying is the purest form of emotional sincerity reminds me of the moment after Hero is accused where Benedick finds Beatrice crying. It is a moment where the snarky Beatrice is being vulnerable, her crying showing that she is not hiding behind her wit and Benedick can see a fully open side of her.

Comparing Claudio to a lion that looks like a lamb carries a new meaning after becoming aware of what he does to Hero. Between him and Benedick, Claudio seemed like the more harmless suitor, being immediately smitten with Hero and very flattering to her. However, as Beatrice states, he sat quietly through the marriage service, like a lamb, before turning on Hero and viciously destroying her reputation, which Beatrice stressed he chose to do publicly.

Benedick is possibly the only character who is concerned with logic and clarifying the situation. He doesn't take things at face value, like with Don John's claims that Don Pedro is seducing Hero. Instead, he considers the accuracy of these statements. Before going into this, he wants to be certain that Beatrice believes that Claudio meant to harm Hero, a skill Claudio could stand to learn.

Here we see reflections of Speght's belief that men and women are one in the same. Benedick wants not only Beatrice's love, but her friendship. He wants her to be on the same level as his friends, Claudio and Don Pedro, valuing her in the same way. This implies that, contradictory to Claudio, he will value her opinions just as much as any man.

Through Sparknotes, I learned that willows were often used to represent unrequited love. This, especially given the fact that Benedick does not believe that Don Pedro is attempting to take Hero from Claudio, paints this in a light of Benedick mocking Claudio, basically stating that he is having a pity party. His mocking mirrors that of Beatrice, tying them together as similar people before their romance starts.

This line by Benedick seems to share the beliefs of Swetnam in his essay. As Swetnam stated, a woman will hold onto a belief even if it is proven wrong or to have any flaws, much like this moment with Benedick in which he states that Beatrice is wrong about him being the Prince's fool, but knows with her strong will that she will never realize this.

This shows the double standards between men and women. While Don Pedro is being accused of a similar act to Hero, betraying Claudio's trust to have a romantic encounter, Claudio does not shame Don Pedro for it and disgrace his reputation, instead simply being hurt. If Don Pedro had done this, only his friendship with Claudio would be harmed, while Hero's accusation caused her to lose her reputation and effectively destroyed any prospects she had.

This line from Margaret could potentially foreshadow the conflict, as Margaret says that nothing bad will come out of what she says as long as no one misinterprets her. Claudio's misunderstanding of the meeting between Borachio and Margaret is what causes the marriage to go horribly wrong.

We've discussed class and how prevalent it was in Shakespeare's time and in this scene, we see someone of a higher authority being prioritized over someone's friend. In this case, we see a moment of good man versus good soldier, in which loyalty to an officer comes before loyalty to a friend.

Similarly to Beatrice, this is a moment that eludes to the idea that Benedick is already interested in Beatrice, however he will not admit it or initiate anything with Beatrice, for fear of being cuckolded. In this way, the pride and fear of both characters stop them from getting together and only when they think the other is being vulnerable and likes them, do they finally get over themselves.

Benedick makes points reminiscent of Beatrice's beard argument. Both characters are highly judgmental towards potential spouses and this is largely because both fear in some way the loss of someone's love, whether through cheating or rejection. They set up thick walls to avoid getting hurt themselves and end up hurting other with their sharp words.

This is one of the moments at the beginning that make the audience wonder if Beatrice was attracted to Benedick before the plot. She is very interested to know if he is coming, as well as who he has brought with him. Considering Beatrice describes Benedick as fickle, it's possible her rejection of him is because she fears losing his love as Benedick looks to a new woman to court.

Beatrice's comment reflects some homoerotic tones that can be found in Shakespeare plays, similarly to Midsummer Night's. Such tones can also be found in this play when interpreting both Beatrice and Benedick's disgust of marriage. This remarks also is another instant for Shakespeare to make a sex joke and a chance for Beatrice to prove her wit to the audience, introducing us to her unfiltered manner of speaking.

In the Woman in White trope, women are placed on a pedestal, being looked up at by men as an object of purity that was idolized but saw them not as a person, rather the idea of a person. Leonato saying "he'll be meet with you" describes the difference in the relationship had between Benedick and Beatrice. They don't see one above the other, but rather as equals with wits that match.

Claudio's demand to Hero reminds me of many trials for witches, which were a lose-lose situation for the women accused. If Hero does not answer the question, she is sullying her maidenhood, however, if she admits there was a man in her bedroom, this also damages her reputation. This is a prime example of oppression on women creating impossible situations for them.

Here again we see dark skin being referred to as a negative trait by characters of Shakespeare. Going back to the idea that many prejudice concepts were still just beginning to form during Shakespeare's time. This remark by Claudio, which is not addressed by anyone, says that he loves Hero so much that even if she were undesirable he would love her, with this being someone with darker skin.

This line reminds me of when Margaret said that Benedick's wit is a dull blade, as it never actually hurts anyone. In comparison, Beatrice is shown to make very sharp remarks and Benedick seems genuinely hurt by her remarks, while she thinks little of his. That is interesting to note because as the story continues, her jabs at Benedick seem to become more playful than pointed as she begins to care for him.

Here is another moment where we see the normalization of male rule over women. Antonio is saying that he believes that because Hero is a good woman, that she obey her father in the decision of marriage, agreeing with whoever he picks for her. Both main women in this play arguably marry someone their father chooses for them, as Antonio is somewhat involved in the agreement for the others to marry his daughter off to Benedick, so Beatrice still falls victim to this.

Becoming aware of the double meanings of words, I now realize just how many sexual references are peppered throughout Shakespeare's plays. In this line, we have Margaret making a joke about a man's "sword" and a woman's "buckler." His frequent references to sexual content, I assume, is to entertain the audience and flex his wit. These innuendos actually fit this particular play very well, as casual banter is common among the characters, and for me it adds to the more natural interactions I like in this play.

This line interested me, as it is the only moment in which the con that Benedick and Beatrice's friends have pulled is remotely revealed to them, and yet Benedick does not seem fully aware of it. This is likely because Leonato is not entirely explicit about what he means, nor does he care to elaborate. Leonato's statement of their involvement is contrasted by asking Benedick's will, as they essentially forced this new couple to fall for each other. While I wish this trick had been revealed, Benedick and Beatrice likely would have not gotten together if they fully knew, as they are both too proud.

Rereading this line with the help of Sparknotes, Beatrice addresses the role marriage plays for women, as well as what power women have in return in this line. She states a husband "having stables enough" or being wealthy, the wife will "see he shall lack no barns" or that she will sleep with him. This highlights, firstly, the role marriage played in women's lives as essentially a business transaction, a means of support in a time when women did not have financial independence. The latter part of that line shows the little power women had: sexual power. Like Queen Elizabeth, many women dangle the price that is their bodies as a means of getting by, attracting a man and pleasing him to have financial support. Perhaps this is her resentment toward the concept of love.

The intelligence and reliability of a lower class person is put into question by Leonato. This is where we see the pervasive belief that working class people are foolish and perhaps not very trustworthy, as Antonio offers to let Leonato question this servant to valid the truth of this information.

These were supposed to be food items associated with foolishness, so Claudio is saying that Benedick is inviting Claudio to a fool's feast, with the possible implication that Claudio believes he will best Benedick at a duel.

This goes back to the earlier dynamic of Christian versus non-Christian, with non-Christians being associated with evil. In this scene, Dogberry is tying Christianity to the inherent goodness of these people, using their religion to make a judgement upon their characters.

Leonato makes a very valid point: do not tell someone the problem they are struggling with is not a big deal, especially if you've never had to experience it yourself. Antonio has never had his own daughter's purity brought into question, especially due to her rejection of most men, and thus has not had to deal with the shame that comes from a society that so highly values women's purity and is deeply concerned with public image.

Even as Benedick says that they are both too smart to fall into the trappings of a traditional courtship, Beatrice turns this on it's head, stating that anyone who says they are wise is not. Rather, she is saying that truthfully, neither will attempt to court each other in a normal manner because they are both too prideful and foolish to allow themselves to fall in love and admit their attractions.

These lines from Beatrice as well as Benedick both seem to be reminiscent of that scene with Cordelia in which she states that she loves her father no more than any daughter should. Similarly, it is the underlying message in both Beatrice and Benedick's statement, which is misconstrued, that is them saying "I love you no more than is reasonable for a person in love."

The double meaning really comes through in this line, when Hero says that the version of her that died was defiled due to the immodest claims made about her, with "defiled" adding to this sexual meaning of died and the nature of her accusation. Saying that she is a maid now also highlights this, as it is saying she is now a virgin.

I think both Benedick and Beatrice seeming ill after beginning to fall for one another is because they are literally becoming "lovesick." This is because neither Beatrice nor Benedick have ever truly been in love before, with the chemicals in your brain being similar to losing one's sanity, so they both attribute these weird sensations to some sort of physical ailment.

This is a rare moment in a Shakespeare where a character addresses the disadvantage that women in Shakespeare's time had. Beatrice knows as a woman she doesn't have as much pull as Claudio to avenge the wrong that Hero has been dealt.

This is a moment similar to the performance at the end of Midsummer, in which the main character mock the working class men for their play being about their mental capacity. The joke in this segment is based on Dogberry being unintelligent, as he minces his words in attempt to sound smart. This is despite the fact that Dogberry discovered Don John's scheme before any of the other characters were aware of it.

This is another moment in a Shakespeare play where a double meaning has sexual implications, as part of Shakespeare's crude humor. In this instance, Benedick revealing his sword could be connotated with him revealing something else. It also adds to certain homoerotic tones present in many of Shakespeare's plays, as Claudio asks about pleasuring them with Benedick's "sword."

We discussed in class how elements of pop culture can have an influence on media in the future. One element of this story that was perhaps popularized is the idea of the romantic interests having this sort of petty rivalry and playful banter between them, as they begin to realize the person they "hate" is the "one" for them. This is something that is very prevalent in the romantic genre of books, film, etc.

While reading through this play, I reflected on the initial statement by Don John about how he was honorable in the sense that he made no attempt at pretending to be anything other than evil, though people still trusted him. Don John was open about the fact that his attempts to manipulate Claudio were malicious, however, the friends and family of Beatrice and Benedick manipulated them into falling in love with each other. This misleading nature of their romance is never truly acknowledged in the play, as they still technically lied to Beatrice and Benedick to influence their feelings artificially and do not own up to the wrongness of manipulation, even if for a "good" reason.

This moment is very interesting for Beatrice, as she acts briefly as she is expected to, being docile and polite in her statement to Beatrice. It could be assumed that this is a more subtle version of her being "tamed," like in Taming of the Shrew, before she resumes her normal behavior in the later lines. The alternative is a moment of genuine politeness toward Benedick, with her newfound feelings betraying her snarky nature for a moment.

This message is often repeated about artists, that their work is only valued once they are gone. I wonder if the friar's line was in part inspired based on Shakespeare's own feelings about the art world. This remark in relation to Hero also reflects ideas in other Shakespeare works, like in Romeo and Juliet, where the families only end their feud when their kids have died. Regardless of why it was included, this line speaks to how people are often only compelled to change when the option is no longer there.

Beatrice addresses how much of an impact these accusation of immodesty will impact Hero. This reflects the dynamic of the Spirit over the Self. It does not matter what type of person Hero is, if her reputation is tarnished by the idea that she is not a virgin, her life is essentially ruined, as her reputation is what the public cares about. Men during this time want a woman who is "pure" to marry and, no longer being desirable, Hero will remain solely dependent on her father for support. How the public sees her matters the most.

Ageism present in King Lear can also be seen in Much Ado, with elders being considered weak and either pitied or ridiculed. With male leadership tied so closely with strength, Leonato's power is disregarded by Claudio due to worn state of age. Under Jungian archetypes, once a man becomes older, he is now the sage, dispensing wisdom that the younger generation can use in their own rein.

Beatrice mocks men for being "feminine" despite not follow traditional gender roles herself, with her outspokenness and sense of independence usually being considered more "masculine." Under a Feminist lens, this could be seen as "feminine" traits being viewed overall as negative when compared to "masculine" traits. While Beatrice possessing the more dominant traits associated as a man gives her the idea of having a bold spirit by those around her, Beatrice is essentially saying these men are weak for acting in a "feminine" way.

These lines by Claudio highlight the way virginity was a representation of purity for women at this time, but not for men. This mentality towards women's sexuality is still existent in the modern era, though not with quite as much prevalence. Claudio's lines also reflect the Woman in White archetype, as Claudio's attraction to Hero is dependent on the idea that she is "pure" or virtuous, as he states. Her desirability is contingent on her beauty, docility, and perceived innocence.

The mistake that Dogberry makes in the meaning of the word tedious is very similar to mistakes made by Bottom, that combined with Dogberry considering himself and Verges poor, we see another mockery of the working class by Shakespeare and their lack of education.

Another crude joke by Shakespeare, with Margaret referencing sex. This serves not only to make the audience laugh, but also highlight the purity of Hero, who is too innocent to tolerate a sex joke by her servant. It also shows the irony who is flustered by the mention of intercourse being accused of being promiscuous before her wedding.

Dogberry and Verges could potentially stand in for the actions of lovers. They both say things contradictory to what they actually mean, much like how people often hide their feelings like Beatrice and Benedick and attack each other verbally. It could also be in reference to deception in this play, with people often falsely conveying information that is not true to get what they want.

Shakespeare expresses an Anti-Semitic stereotype that was likely still forming during this time about Jewish people being cruel. This was likely in part because Shakespeare lived in a predominantly Protestant country and his casual use of such an offensive statement likely aided in the vilification of the Jewish community.

Benedick's statement, as well as the ploy the friends of Beatrice and Benedick, actually fit with the psychological phenomenon of reciprocal liking. Reciprocal liking states that you are more likely to be attracted to someone once you realize that they are attracted to you. We see this with Benedick as he considers that Beatrice is a beautiful and virtuous woman and he would consider marrying her now that he knows that she's in love with him.

This is another discussion of shame and social norms, with Beatrice being considered "immodest" for attempting to pursue a man that she is interested in when, traditionally, it is the man's job to pursue the woman. Beatrice knows she will be mocked for being so forward as a woman, in part due to their feud, but also due to the fact that she would not come across as a docile woman.

This is another moment in the play where the threat of shame is used to disband the marriage, with both Don Pedro and Claudio facing a wound on their reputations. Claudio's shame specifically relates to Hero not being a virgin, which highlights the way that the sexuality of women was treated, as being more sexually active was seen as shameful for women, but not men. Going along with the Woman in White trope, the virginity of a woman is associated with her purity, a trait deemed desirable in women.

This is one of the moments we see Beatrice seem ashamed of her mouthiness, or at least apologize for it. From what we've learned about courtesy, her reaction might not be genuine, but rather a moment of her saving face, as Don Pedro is one of the more powerful characters in the story. It is interesting to note that her conformity to social norms in this moment is considered one of her kinder moments.

Don John's motives seem reminiscent of both Iago and Edmund. For the latter, Don John seems to hold resentment for the power that his brother allotted due to his status as a legitimate child, which paints him the villain for seeking power that he is denied, defying societal rules. Like Iago, he blames Claudio in part for his lack of success and seeks to cause problems with Claudio's romance with Hero.

Leonato's joke implying the infidelity of his wife indicates the embarrassment surrounding cuckolding, as the essence of his joke is over the shamefulness that would come from having a daughter that was not truly his. It is interesting to note the difference in the way an illegitimate child is viewed when coming from the husband versus the wife, with the husband's illegitimate child still outcast but still seeming to be the fault of the woman than the man in many cases, such as with Edmund in King Lear.

Here Shakespeare employs another crude joke, with "mountanto" being a fencing term referring to upward thrusting. It could potentially be a joke upon his name, though I don't think "dick" had the same connotation yet. This displays Beatrice's wit, as she makes a lewd joke about her nemesis, as well as her defiance of social norms, as she is not afraid to insult a powerful man openly.

As we've discussed previously, many prejudices were just beginning to form and cement themselves during Shakespeare's time. This particular comment by Benedick seems to be an early iteration of the idea that marriage is a trap to a man. It also highlights the difference in how marriage was approached between men and women, with women essentially being dependent on marriage for financial support and often having little say on the matter. Men were not necessarily required to get married and weren't defined by it in the way women were.

It was this line that truly made me think this might be my favorite of the plays we have read. After reading through both Othello and King Lear, even Midsummer, it was refreshing to read a play in which the characters actually communicate and attempt to solve the miscommunications of the play. Benedick says to Claudio what I wish had been said to Othello, that being that after knowing someone for so long, you should know their character and not be so easily convinced otherwise of it.

Benedick and Beatrice are some of the characters being mocked for their hubris in this play, with both believing they are above the romance that affects those around them, which through the hijinks of this play, they will ultimately be proven wrong. Their decision to marry each other at the end of this play is seen as a restoration of social order as opposed to a manipulation of emotions.

Benedick's distrust in women and distain for marriage reflect the ideas of shame and embarrassment we discussed in class that permeate the play. His fear of cuckolding seem to be associated with the societal shame and embarrassment that come with a man being cheated on by his wife, the idea of a man being "emasculated" by not fulfilling his role of controlling his wife.

This line by Benedick highlights a theme present in Shakespeare's works that love causes you to see things through new eyes. While Benedick did not think much of Hero, because Claudio is interested in her he doesn't just look at her, he "notes" her. This scene captures the relatable feeling of one friend having a crush and the other person failing to understand why they like this person. This change in perception of someone is noted by Claudio himself, when he states that he's met Hero before but only now notices her beauty.

This remark from Don John is an interesting mentality in that it contradicts the sentiments had by Iago. Don John is open about being villainous, in comparison to Iago who attempted to be covert, Don John argues that it is better to be forthcoming about your nature than attempt to deceive people about the type of person you are. In this way, he is shifting responsibility off of himself and onto the other characters of the story by essentially saying "if you thought I was a good person and were tricked by me because of it, that's your fault".

This is another instance of a darker complexion being related to a lack of purity. Such beliefs could be related to racism or classism, depending upon how you interpret it, as working class people would have had a darker complexion than those of a higher class because they would be working out in the sun. What strikes me is how casually this is discussed, as Benedick is making a jab at Hero offhandedly. The subtly of this is where the normalization of such beliefs of colorism begin.

This remark is very similar to that made during Henry V, in which authorities only prioritize higher class individuals and working class people are treated as expendable. In this play, as well as many others of Shakespeare, the working class citizens are treated not as people, but rather plot devices that can be used by these characters to achieve what they desire, such as Don John using Hero's servant to convince Claudio of Hero's infidelity.

Theseus does not believe the story the couples have told him, but instead of suspecting fairy influence, he is convinced what they have seen is the result of being lovesick, citing that the insane, those in love, and those in creative fields allow their imagination to affect their logic, causing them to believe in fantastical things.

Here we see Demetrius making the reference to cuckolds, implying that the Moonshine actor is one. This, besides being a joke to the audience, also demonstrates Shakespeare's wit by having Demetrius play off Theseus's statement about the "horned moon".

Look at this through a lens of sexism, we see the phenomenon of women comparing themselves and competing with other women. Instead of address the devious nature of Demetrius and his treatment of Helena, Helena blames Hermia for her lack of success with Demetrius, judging her for her beauty.

Here we see another reference in which Bottom seems to fulfill the role of the Beast, being considered a monster. This reflects many paintings done of Bottom and Titania, where while Titania fills the role of the Woman in White, looking very pristine and glowing, Bottom is shown to be dirty and there is evidence of the work that he does. This contrast is meant to be comedic, as she is interested in someone of lower status who is inferior to her.

It's interesting that height holds a status of its own. The relevance as to why this is mentioned so much, I am uncertain of. I assume that height was a desirable trait, either in Ancient Greece or potentially in Shakespeare's time. Otherwise, their height could be representative metaphorically as their status, being "above" someone else and "looking down" at someone inferior.

This remark by Oberon could be seen as another example of Shakespeare demeaning the lower class, as Oberon suggest that Titania will fall for some beastly animal. When Titania falls in love with Bottom, it could be argued that this is implying that Bottom is the Beast and with his donkey head, he certainly looks the part. The parallel of Bottom to an animal places him in an inferior position and mocks the less sophisticated nature of the rustics.

This line speaks a lot to why Helena marries Demetrius at the end of the play. Under the ideas of Love that this play sets up, someone truly loves you when they are willing to do anything for you, even if it hurts them. Helena exemplifies this both in her actions and her words. She tells Demetrius of Lysander and Hermia's plot to elope, even when it jeopardizes her own chances with Demetrius because she is loyal to a fault to him. In this way, Helena brings back the debate of good woman vs. good wife. She fulfills the role of a good wife by being endlessly loyal to Demetrius, but betrays her own friends in the process.

The choice of making the dye purple, I think, is an interesting one as purple dye was rare and used as a symbol of status. Describing this potion as purple adds to its rarity and the decision by Oberon to give this to these particular humans demonstrates an inherent worth present, a notable status. This link to status can be noted in the sense that the only character who receive the potion are upper class. None of the rustics are given it.

Demetrius's line mocks the intelligence of these rustics by calling them asses, the very same reason Puck gave Bottom the head of an ass, to indicate his foolishness. The comparison of the workingmen to animals also reflects their perceived inferiority, as on the Ladder of Intelligence, animals are placed beneath humans in the same way that these rich people view themselves as above the rustics.

This line stood out to me because Theseus addresses something that most characters in tragedies are oblivious to: people don't always say what they are trying to express or how they feel. This reminds me of Lear's apology or lack thereof, similarly to the greeting that Theseus received, Lear never explicitly apologizes to Cordelia, but reading between the lines, Cordelia can understand his intentions. Lear fails to do this in the earlier scene of the play when each daughter confesses how much they care about their father. Cordelia cannot put into words her love for her father, but Lear fails to recognize this underlying meaning in her statement toward him.

The trade off of the boy is addressed very casually in this scene, with no comment made on it later. Similarly to how women are treated like objects, the boy is also treated like an item. Oberon has gotten what he wanted, but receives no punishment from Titania after. Oberon's remark is being made as everything is being righted, suggesting that Oberon taking the boy as his novelty was the right decision. The treatment of an Indian boy as a plot device speaks to his worth as viewed by Shakespeare. He is merely a bargaining chip between the fairies.

Though the events of this night involve could be described as a departure from social norms, the events of that night actually cause them to remain within societal constraints. In Lysander and Hermia's original plans, they were going to circumvent Athenian law entirely by sneaking away to elope. However, the hijinks the entire group become involved in actually causes them to carry out their marriage under Athenian law, with both women being successfully married off.

This is an interesting moment for Bottom, as he is showing himself to be somewhat humble or, at least treating the servants as equals, which could be related to his status as a lower class worker who we later learn makes very little money, with a reward from this play being his greatest income. The response to class division coming from Bottom, however, seems to be a mock on the part of Shakespeare, as Bottom is known as the foolish, comedic character.

Titania is another woman whose outspokenness gets her punished. Instead of talking it out or respecting her wishes to keep the boy, Oberon decides to drug her and manipulate her into giving him the boy. Only after Oberon forces Titania to do what he wants does he free her from the spell. Despite being outside of the rules, this punishment of women still exists.

This brings about the implication of Helena not being a virgin, while Hermia is still a virgin. This follows the societal ideals of the time and the Woman in White trope. From a Feminist perspective, Hermia is perceived as more pure and desirable potentially because she is a virgin and Helena is not. Such ideas put Hermia on a pedestal, while condemning Helena for being more sexual, something that is never broached for the men in the story.

Shakespeare throughout his plays seems to run a weird line between pandering to upper and lower class citizens, one that more greatly favors the upper class. While he provides some characters who are honorable lower class workers and a crude joke to laugh at, most of his plays follow the lives of the upper class, reference works that only those with access to education would understand, and makes constant jabs at the perceived lack of intelligence of lower class people. Unfortunately, his plays are one of the only ways those with a low income could learn about history and hear stories, especially those that were illiterate.

Theseus's remark to the lovers and to Egeus reflects a ruler who only wants to rule as he desires to in that moment. While previously Theseus said that this matter was out of his hands, now he says that he can overrule Egeus's legal ownership over his daughter because he feels like doing it. This begs the question of what influence does someone like Demetrius have over a ruler that the other characters don't, as he is the only character whose stance on the matter has changed.

This line very succinctly summarizes A Midsummer Night's Dream, as the chaos in this play is motivated by love and characters like Helena do not agree with they are making, but know that they will make them anyway because they are in love. The lovers are trying to find logic and determine what is "right" and "wrong" in an affair that doesn't have clear-cut rules, with Oberon and Titania effectively embodying this.

This line, when compared with Helena's earlier statement of her and Hermia being "artificial gods" further lays out subtext for a relationship between the two. Helena is saying that Demetrius, being obsessed with her now, sees her as a divine being, similarly to how Helena and Hermia saw each other when they were spending time together as youths.

This is another line in this play that relates darker skin to being unattractive. These references are thrown around casually as an insult, but are subtle ways to continue to enforce growing racial stereotypes at this time. The references are also intertwined with mentions of Romas, who were, and still are, a persecuted group in Europe.

Even in this short line, we can see gender expectations at play. The ivy is depicted as female, being a less rough plant that could be considered "dainty" when compared to the rough and sturdy elm. It is also considered clingy and dependent on the elm for support, much like how women were viewed to be.

Relating to the idea that marriage is the natural order of things, this line by Puck definitely reflects this idea, as marriage effectively solves the problems in the story and is the reward of the heroes at the end. The line "nought shall go ill" implies that following these rules will allow them to prosper.

The emphasis on whiteness in these lines emphasizes the standard of beauty that existed during that time, being both of racism and colorism, that whiteness and paleness are a marker of beauty and are considered a preferred trait. This also ties into classism, as people usually could avoid a tan if they were not required to spend much time outside, whether farming or working out in markets.

Helena's statement to Lysander has multiple layers to it. Her distrust in Lysander's vows likely call back to the similar vows made by Demetrius to her, before he began pursuing Hermia. Lysander is now doing the same thing, making promises to a new girl that he made to the one he loved before. The specific use of "Hermia's" when describing the vows, implying ownership, also harkens back to the idea that Helena believes Hermia to be better than her and having all that Helena desires.

Shakespeare is using his wit to play with the duel meaning of "asshead," in which Bottom is referencing the insult when speaking to Snout, accusing him of being rude, while the audience is aware of its literal meaning, as Bottom's face has been changed into a donkey. The use of this crude language openly also speaks to the impressions of their lower class, being considered less proper and polite.

The scene with the rustics not only plays to the comedic effect of their incompetence, but it also exaggerates the earlier criticism made of censorship. This is important because the exaggeration of such criticism causes themselves to be viewed as what is being mocked, allowing Shakespeare to make such statements without facing backlash from the monarch.

This line by Lysander could have some sexist undertones, under the implication that the decisions of a man are always won over by logic, that they are not influenced by their emotions. Such thinking was often the reason (and still is) why women are considered unfit to rule, as they are too influenced by their emotions and not logic. Ironically, Lysander's statement is false, in that his current decision is because he was technically won over by "feelings" in the context of the love potion.

Lysander's remark to Hermia has two meaning here: one being the sexual nature of consummating their marriage and the other is a reference to the Greek belief of Plato that humans once had four arms and legs and two heads, but Zeus, fearing their power, split them in half. This created soulmates, as each half went looking for the other.

Puck fits the role of the trickster, going against the natural order of things. This line is very reminiscent of the speech by the Fool in Lear, in which he declares the downfall of England will be when things do not operate as they always have.

In another moment of Shakespeare perpetuating forming ideas, Shakespeare is encourage a concept that remains a problem today: if someone rejects your advances, just keep pursuing them until you wear them down and they reciprocate your feelings. This is inevitably supported at the end when Helena ends up with Demetrius at the end of the play. Hypocritically, Demetrius does a similar thing to Hermia, but seems to be unaware that he is doing what he berates Helena for.

In Bromwich's essay, he emphasized the importance of the hero coming to self-recognition. From this line of Titania's, one could argue that she already displays self-recognition, as she acknowledges that the quarrels between her and Oberon are causing many things to go wrong in the world around them. She states flat-out that they are both solely responsible for the chaos that is forming around them.

Titania used the marriage contract against Oberon, as he says that a woman must obey her husband, she retorts that he is not following this contract either. A man must only have his wife and Oberon is accused of sleeping around. This is a moment of a woman proudly putting her foot down, instead of with shame, while still being a "good guy" in this story.

Similarly to the treatment of Hermia, this boy is being treated like an object to be owned over a person with his own autonomy. This reflects the treatment of women and people of color as second-class citizens. Oberon's jealousy of Titania having the boy also speaks to the racist ideas of non-European people being "exotic" and this child being treated almost as a novelty item.

This is a moment of Shakespeare making a commentary on his own society's censorship, while relating it to a more distant time so as not to receive backlash. This line is very meta, as the characters state they will not add something in their play that could upset the upper crust, while Shakespeare is choosing to add something that could upset the monarch watching his play.

Bottom's misuse of "generally" as opposed his likely intended meaning of "individually," is a way to demonstrate Bottom's intense hubris, as he tries to sound smart despite being incorrect in his word choice. This is also an example of class division, with Shakespeare essentially mocking those who are of lower class and likely do not have access to proper education, being seen as less intelligent because of this disadvantage.

Shakespeare seems to indicate the goodness of his characters, as well as how this goodness will be betrayed in the future, by having characters who are extremely trusting to their own fault. This is similar, though not to the same extent, to Othello's own excessive trust in people causing problems for him in the future. As a comedy, we know this has a better outcome.

This line by Hermia might be a reference to Demetrius's deception/betrayal of Helena, as being close with Helena, Hermia is aware of how Demetrius lied to Helena about the truth in his love. Hermia, despite loving Lysander, may still be wary of the promises of a man, after seeing how her friend was just as easily disappointed with the man she loved.

The reference to love being like a strike of lightning is actually very witty, as in the French language, love at first sight is "le coup de foudre," which translates literally to "the strike of lightning." With Lysander being considered somewhat of a poet, he is very cleverly displaying his wit as he comforts Hermia. By extension, Shakespeare is displaying his wit to upper class audience members who likely would have known French.

This again emphasizes the idea of Renaissance comedies: the importance of social order. Egeus is stating that following Theseus makes him happy, he finds joy in obeying the social status and orders of Theseus. This is a not very subtle reference to the moral of these comedies.

In a similar move to Desdemona, when Hermia speaks her mind and attempts to put her foot down, she does so with much shame, as she is aware that her doing so is not "proper" for a woman. This in some sense negates her autonomy in this scene, from a Feminist perspective, as she expresses her opinions, Hermia also states that this is outside her rights.

Hermia's remark reflects the concept of Existentialism, in which there exists no universal truth, but rather truth is subjective and shaped by an individual's experiences. If Hermia's father could experience the world as she did, look "with my eyes," he would see the merit behind Hermia's decision of Lysander over Demetrius.

Through a psychoanalytical lens, we could see how this reflects feelings Shakespeare has about himself and his profession. In many of Shakespeare's sonnets, poems are presented as a true honoring of love, as you attempt to capture the essence of the person you love for eternity in a poem, so their memory lives forever. However, in his self-deprecation, he could also be mocking himself, as Shakespeare often doubted the merits of his work in other sonnets.

This line is a double entendre. It reflects the Chivalric concept of the knight winning the Woman in White, such as in the Accolade, where Theseus presented himself to Hippolyta and for his military prowess, was rewarded. This also could be perceived as having a lewd connotation, as this play is full of dick jokes, with his "sword" being a stand in.

This is the subtle reference to the Summer Solstice that we discussed in class, though not ever officially named, but all the events line up with the Summer Solstice. It is interesting that on the longest day of the year, all the chaotic events take place over the night, emphasizing the quick escalation of events.

Cordelia is another character that seemed to predict her fate, suggesting she is inherently good because she is able to reflect on wisdom when other characters are blind to it. Her death, like Desdemona's, seems to be more sacrificial, keeping her a pure maiden that was a casualty in others' nefarious plots and causes the audience to be upset with the actions of the villains and how it affected others.

This establishes Gloucester as a man who follows divine rules and, thus, explains why is not punished as the other characters are. His death is more peaceful because he realizes that if the gods intended a fate for him, Gloucester must obey their wishes. His conformity is rewarded by a less violent death.

This scene parallels the reactions many characters have to the events of the play. Though they may know things are not going well, they pretend that they are not aware of this and allow themselves to accept this falseness so as not to deal with their current situation.

Even the way Shakespeare writes about characters referring to a woman and her husband shows the subservient role that the women are placed in. Regan, in this scene, is always referred to after her husband or, in this line, simply as "his wife" because she is defined by her role in relation to a man. Placing her husband's name before her also suggests he is more important than her.

This stresses the importance that social standing had on people at this time. Lear is claiming that death is a better fate than humiliation, especially that that reflects back onto him. This shame seems to set apart the sane from the insane as well, with Lear no longer having shame over being locked up at the end of the play when his sanity is slipping, but fearing it in this moment.

This statement by Albany sets up a theme that exists in this play, that being that people who have done wrong are unable to realize when they've received wisdom that could prevent them from continuing down a destructive. Lear is the most obvious offender of this, having both the Fool and Kent repeatedly warning him of the consequences of his actions and he is ultimately punished at the end of the play.

This hammers in the tragedy message of defying tradition. Albany implies that she is morally corrupt because she is not fulfilling the role of loyalty a woman is meant to have to their family. He is also prophesizing her eventual end, suggesting that her demise is destined.

While Goneril is shown as the evil that comes from a powerful woman, a betrayal of the "feminine" role, her husband faces a similar treatment for being the more passive one in their relationship. Even Goneril seems to feel this way, as she is attracted to Edmund because he fits this more "masculine" role of being in charge and more domineering.

Shakespeare again makes another lewd joke to appeal to the audience's crude sense of humor, potentially to lighten up the serious tone of the play. This is also possibly used to indicate his madness, as we discussed in class that madness could be equated to betraying societal conventions. His lack of inhibitions from his madness would allow "Tom" to say something so crude that other characters wouldn't dare say.

Shakespeare's use of a metaphor in these lines fits the role of the Fool: on the surface, it seems like the Fool is simply rambling about nonsense, but when looking at the deeper meaning, the Fool is warning Lear that the daughter he raised is coming back to overthrow him in return.

This reflects the roles we discussed in class, specifically that the Fool, despite seeming absurd, secretly acts as the voice of reason. Goneril, in this moment, fills in for a king's advisor, seeming to be reasonable but is secretly nefarious. This is emphasized as the Fool alerts Lear to Goneril's true intentions, while Goneril appears to be the one encouraging order in the play.

Looking through a psychoanalytical lens, Goneril fits the role of the id in our story. This moment exemplifies that, as Goneril impulsively poisons Regan because she is angry about Regan's advances at Edmund. As a character, most of her acts are her being reactive, not premeditated. Her interest in Edmund, for example, is less practical like Regan's and more of an attraction toward him.

This fits with Bromwich's concept of self-recognition and that as a tragedy's hero starts to express language of self-recognition, they are deepening their self-deception at the same time. This is reflected with Lear, whose lines in this dialogue seem to hint at the king realizing that he was wrong, though an apology is never openly given. In his later statement to Cordelia as they go to prison, we see this aspect of self-deception in which King Lear states that everything will be fine, denying the damage that he has done.

This moment highlights the big divide between Lear and Othello despite both following similar paths. Due to racial prejudice, Othello acts as a cautionary tale and deemed a horrific man, while Lear is, at the end, memorialized as a figure of true leadership. While this play ends with people mourning and honoring Lear's death, Othello ends with mourning of Desdemona's death and the manipulation that caused it.

Gloucester, interestingly, is the only character die somewhat happily in the play, dying from the joy of seeing his son. His death is perhaps not a punishment so much as a way for Edgar to take over his father's place as ruler, since he has proven his character throughout the story, he is now being handed over the crown. It is also Gloucester finally at peace after all the happenings of the play.

This ties into the parallels between King James and Lear, as Lear believes that he can do no wrong and demands the respect of his subjects. His statement of punishing his daughters implies that even now he still maintains power, as he believes this is a right of his to rule even as he has given. This fits with King James's attitude that he could do no wrong and had a divine right to rule.

This scene is interesting in that, similarly to Desdemona, this is the only scene in the play where we see Cordelia actively speak out and voice her opinion in a more assertive way. However, like Desdemona, this moment only comes because she is using her voice to praise a man in her life: while she is voicing her opinion, she is not contradicting Lear, but rather professing her devotion.

Here the reference of Regan as grotesque because of her cruel heart also cements the idea of Cordelia being the "Woman in White" because she is beautiful due to her purity and kindness of heart, as well as her docile and "ladylike" nature. She is desirable compared to her sisters because she complies with social norms and remains very passive throughout the play, compared to her outspoken sisters.

Regan displays similar beliefs to Edmund in this scene, showing that a person should be judged by their merits, not based on status or, in her case, gender. However, Shakespeare has them achieve their merits through cruel and manipulative means, painting these achievements as evil and harmful to others. He also shows a woman contradicting her husband and demanding equality, something she is eventually punished for.

Perceived status is very evident in this line by Albany, in which the societal significance overshadows the achievements of Edmund and invalidates all the work that Edmund has put in to earn the power and respect his brother has a legitimate child. This harkens back to Shakespeare's message of the play that one cannot escape societal rules without punishment. Edmund's efforts to escape his identity as a bastard prove fruitless and ultimately lead to his death.

This is an instance not only of King Lear being warned about his actions and given a chance to prevent his fate, but it also is an instance in which we see Cordelia acting as our "Woman in White." Kent references her pure heart and also states that her quietness is proof of that. His statement could be related back to the scolds, in which Cordelia is considered to be a more honest and kind woman because she keeps her thoughts to herself, while her sisters are very vocal about their love for their father. This latter part is attributed, in part, by Kent to be a sign of their untruthfulness.

This highlights why the sisters are being punished in this tragedy. As Oswald states in this line, Goneril wielding power and taking control over the situation better than her husband. From a historical lens, she is not only defying her role as a docile wife, but she is also disrespecting her husband by taking authoritative power that would be his. She is not in a subservient role, but rather a leadership position. This similar to Othello, who takes a leadership position despite some members of society treating him as inferior. In both cases an oppressed group is being punished for reaching a higher level of authority.

These lines demonstrate the message in Shakespeare's tragedies over the importance of conformity, as well as the damage this does to those oppressed in society. Edmund brings up the valid criticism that it is unfair that he is not given the same privileges as his brother simply because society looks down on him as an illegitimate child. However, he is fated to become a villain and die tragically, cementing to the audience that there are consequences for attempting to evade the system.

This mirrors our discussion in class about the roles of both daughters to their fathers and lords to their kings. Both Regan as Lear's daughter and Cornwall as Lear's lord are meant to be loyal and kind to Lear and their actions are not just seen as cruel but a defiance of the natural order. This is also an ironic statement coming from Edmund, who is also going against his father, however, looking from a Feminist perspective, we can see that Goneril and Regan's betrayal of their father seems to be seen specifically as evil and unnatural. Comparing this with Edmund, whose betrayal is explained away as due to him being a bastard.

This speech by the Fool follows with the theme of the play that people who break the rules will be punished. The Fool is stating that the ruin of England will come when people act outside of the way they are supposed, which is what we see in the punished characters of King Lear. Goneril and Regan defy their traditional roles as loyal daughters and, on Goneril's part, wives.

This is another example of Shakespeare's wit being displayed in his play, as well as an example of dramatic irony. We as the audience know that Kent is very much not in Germany, but rather right in from the gentleman. The response by Kent that things aren't always true is very comical to the audience who knows the truth of the situation. It's a very humorous line that lightens the mood of the play.

Similarly to comments made in Henry V, outside of the rich aristocrats that we usually follow in a Shakespeare narrative, many working class citizens that are tied up in the drama of these tragedies are not participating out of their own investment in the conflict. They are not in the position to make such a decision, whether due to power or money. In this line, it is the latter, with this captain aiding because this is his source of income. As Williams said in Henry V, the common man is often forced to participate in a war that he does not believe in.

The complaints of King Lear parallel those of Shakespeare in one of his sonnets. In both cases, authorities are chastised for the hypocrisy in which they rule. People under these systems are often punished for crimes mirroring those of people in positions of power, who avoid their own retribution. This is an example of Shakespeare using his plays to make a critical commentary on his society, while being covert.

Under the lens of Feminism, the specific choice of "soft" and "gentle" mirrors ideals of women being docile and innocent, implying a sort of daintiness. Similarly, the word choice of "low," while possibly meaning deeper in pitch, likely means quiet, reflecting the idea of women being soft-spoken and keeping their opinions to themselves. Cordelia, a "good guy" in our story, fits the standards of femininity in this story and for the time.

These lines highlight the class division present in this play, with nobility associated with good character. This approached differently than in Henry V, where it is treated as a problem that Henry V eventually "fixes" by treating the commonman as his equal. In King Lear, there is no issue in class division, it is instead normalized and passed off as a minor inconvenience.

As we discussed in class, there are power dynamics in Shakespeare's plays. In King Lear, besides class and sexism, the dynamic of Legitimate/Illegitimate is also present. Edmund is considered inferior and inherently evil due to his status as a bastard. Similar to Othello, whose murdering of Desdemona is blamed on him being an African, Edmund's actions are blamed on the fact that he is a bastard. Both establish evil as a trait that someone is born with based on a trait that society deems inferior.

While in Othello, we discussed the feminization of Othello, here Goneril is being masculinized by Shakespeare, under the idea that she must slip into the role of a man to take charge and lead the group. This enforces the idea that to be feminine is to be weak and for a woman to be strong and assertive, she must become masculine.

This relates back to Renaissance Humanism, in which the Classics is looked to as the ideal. The term "Theban" was relating to someone from Thebes and Lear's comparison of "Tom" to a Greek man, is used to speak to his wisdom and intelligence. This, in the middle of a tragedy, works to both display the deterioration of Lear's mind and also provide comedic relief in the anthesis between the comparison of an intellect and "Tom," who is spouting nonsense.

This highlights an element that was present in Othello and is now present in this, that being that as people are blinded by their emotions in certain situations, they do not think critically about the people they are surround themselves with and therefore trust people who are very cunning and self-interested.

Shakespeare's use of dramatic irony is not just a potentially comedic moment for the audience, it also highlights the lack of awareness the characters of this play possess, with two people being disguised around people who know them closely, and how they are so easily manipulated by people like Edmund.

From a Psychoanalytical perspective, Lear believes that "Tom" must have been wronged by his daughters because he is projecting his own trauma onto someone else as a way to relate to Tom and because of how consumed he is by his own issues that he cannot consider how others may have different experiences. This fits well with his daughters' complaints that he is inconsiderate.

One thing that strikes me in this story compared to Othello is the presence of greater autonomy and agency among the women of the play. Under a Feminist light, it is interesting to note that Goneril and Regan, the two women who are shown to be the most capable planning and taking charge are written as the story's villains, while the more docile Cordelia is seen as a hero.

Gloucester's talk of the curse of a late eclipse echoes back to the ideas of Renaissance Humanism and the war between Science and Literature. Gloucester has a more mystical and Romantic opinion of the stars and their effects on the world. This is later contrasted by Edmund's lack of a belief in the power of the stars and is a clever way to highlight the divide between Edmund and his father, with Edmund being more rational, while Gloucester is more emotional.

This relates to our discussion in class over who possesses the power in a group and, by proxy, what group is valued over the other. The references of charms and working with the moon imply a Pagan religion, and the connotations within the dialogue associate the practicing of Pagan religions with evil-doing. This also reflects the attitude held by English during the time of Shakespeare, in which Pagans were demonized.

Gloucester's belief here reflects ideology present in the Postmodernism concept of Marxism, in which the idea exists that if everyone worked for the common good, there would be no class division. This also reflects a potential moral of the story, that being that if everyone shared their power, the conflicts of the story would be resolved. Edmund would not have manipulated his father and brother, and King Lear would not have been abused by his daughters.

The Fool's comment in this dialogue as the tragedy's satire is Shakespeare's way of emphasizing a moral of this story: do not reject those that truly love you. This line also foreshadows King Lear's inevitable fate of slipping into madness as he is filled more with pain and regret over his rash choice.

This is similar to the approach used by Iago to trick Othello into fearing Desdemona's infidelity. From a Psychoanalytical lens, it is clear that the villain gaslights their victim by making them question the integrity of a loved one, causing them to panic, before minimizing their distress. Edmund also mirrors Iago in his hunt for power, but is not as successful at maintaining an air of trustworthiness for as long.

The King of France's lines to Cordelia, especially with the intense presence of gender roles in the play, feel very reminiscent to the attitude of Luzhin in Crime and Punishment, in which Luzhin values Dunya in part for her poverty, believing that a poor wife means that she is forever in debt to you and should be grateful of you marrying her.

Under the view of Feminism, we see Cordelia being marketed off like an object for marriage, in which Burgundy is only willing to marry her if he can get a fair amount of dowry for her. This also reflects the way women were under men's control for their entire lives, being controlled by their fathers until they were married off.

Cordelia's approach to this situation reflects the phrase "actions speak louder than words." Under Psychoanalysis, she also reflects the idea that people possess different love languages in the way that they express their love to someone. While King Lear may be looking for compliments, Cordelia's love language may be Acts of Service, in which she proves her love by doing something for him, shown later when she comes to his aid to rescue him. However, as King Lear's love language is Words of Affirmation, he is unable to recognize her gestures of affection as her love for him.

In these lines by Edmund, Shakespeare is cheekily foreshadowing the events of the play. This not only shows off the wit of the writer, but it also is a nod to audience members who have already seen the play before, a subtle Easter egg of sorts.

This is a moment that references the end of the play, in which Othello denies Desdemona some time before she is murdered. This illustrates the 180 in Othello's opinion of Desdemona, as well as how great an effect Iago had on their relationship, with Iago shattering a relative respectful and healthy relationship compared to others in the play.

Cassio also fits as an embodiment of the superego. As a character, many of Cassio's decisions are motivated by how he will be perceived by his peers. Cassio initially gets drunk and gets into a fight because he is pressured into drinking by Iago, who says that his peers will want to drink with him. In this scene, he worries about getting his position back, stressing over the shame it is bring him. He later refuses to marry Bianca because she is a prostitute.

This scene between Desdemona and Cassio is reminiscent of the marriage scene between Othello and Iago, in that Iago, who holds a societal advantage over Othello in European/Non-European, but lowers himself to Othello in that scene as his servant. Here Cassio, who in the man/woman ideals holds a higher status, claims to be Desdemona's servant. Interestingly, in both situations the one who claims servitude ends up getting the other character killed.

Ironically, Othello and Desdemona's relationship began not with open communication about their feelings, but rather with investigating subtext. Othello had to find the underlying meaning in her words to discover she was interested in him. This follows when he believes she is having an affair and looks into everything she says and does.

These lines of Iago's encapsulate the essence of the id. He is impulsively deciding to cause chaos just because he feels like it and wants to harm someone who has upset him. Being the id, Iago, while aware of how his actions affect others, does not seem to care.

Looking from a Feminist approach, Cassio is a married man and yet he never receives flax for having extramarital affairs. Iago, who pursued revenge against Othello under the assumption that he slept with Emilia, critiques Cassio for not being able to control his wife. This also shows us that in the debate between being a good man and a good husband, Cassio has failed to be a good husband.

This again relates Othello to the qualms had with King James, in which people found him to be cocky and he regularly received praise from his inner circle. Iago, though, establishes himself immediately as Othello's foil, as he is also confident in his inner circle and walked into this assuming he would automatically receive the position.

This highlights the idea in this play later addressed by Emilia, in which she states that women derive their power from the use of their bodies. Iago makes a similar claim in these lines that a woman, regardless of her intelligence or appearance, can utilize her sexual appeal to get what she wants. This is reminiscent of early strategies of Elizabeth I, in which she dangled herself as the prize to form alliances.

In the concept of being a good wife (or lover) versus a good woman, Bianca manages to ride the line. She is loyal to Cassio in the hours of his need, as well as less crucial moments, such as stitching him another handkerchief, all while not compromising her morals. Bianca, from a Feminist lens, also manages to have the most agency of all the women in the play. She loves Cassio, but is quick to call him out when he has wronged her. In this line, she gives him an ultimatum and an opportunity to clean his act up.

This line from Brabantio illustrates one of the power dynamics we discussed in class: Christian versus non-Christian. Othello's position as an outsider, and likely not Christian due to the fact that he's from outside of Europe, his religious practices are quickly mocked and demonized. This mirrors the treatment of Pagans from the British Crown, who were considered evil witches.

Though Othello was compared to the id in class, certain elements of his character mirror that of the superego. At various points in the play, Othello expresses deep concern for the fate of his reputation, that being a major component to how society views him. His shame in being cheated on is, in part, a fear of how society will view him as less of a man if it is discovered his wife has cheated on him.

In class, we defined Iago, as well as Othello, as the id motivated characters of this play, under the approach of Psychoanalysis. It's interesting to note the different ways this manifests in both character. While Othello is very impulsive, he also is a deeply moral person. On the other hand, Iago is meticulous in his planning, but motivated by his self-serving desires.

This is foreshadowing to the events ahead and referencing how the conflict would not come from the Turks, but them. The irony that comes from Othello's statement is one that you only realize after having read the play, as he commits one of the more brutal acts in this story.

Under the view of Existentialism, Othello would not be considered necessarily innocent in this, as in this approach, the outcome of the situation was based on a culmination of choices that led to the tragedy, so therefore Othello and Iago are equally responsible based on the decisions that both of them made.

From a Psychoanalytical Criticism approach, this is mirrors the attitude that Shakespeare possesses in much of his sonnets. He is projecting onto Othello in this scene, lamenting heartbreak and also boosting his ego by stating that Othello is susceptible to this because he is such an impressive and powerful man. This portrays Othello as a romantic and the tie between Shakespeare and Othello suggests that despite any atrocities that Othello may commit, Shakespeare wants us to still care for him.

These lines both foreshadow Iago's plans and highlight that Iago has very strong feelings about adultery, similarly to Desdemona's and Othello's. This, combined with a similar military rank, poses Iago and Othello as foils for each other. Both are successful, proud military leaders who condemn adultery, though Iago is a liar and conniving, while Othello is terribly honest and very trusting.

Through this interaction between Cassio and Emilia, it could be inferred that perhaps Emilia had an affair with Cassio, rather than Othello. This would be an ironic twist on Iago, whose own perception of reality is just as distorted as Othello's will soon be.

While a more outspoken moment for Desdemona, from a Feminist lens, Desdemona perfectly illustrates the way women were transferred from one man to another during this time, as though they were a piece of property. This written less as her autonomously going off to marry Othello, but swearing her obedience to him as opposed to her father.