Kent

One of the characters I admired for their loyalty was Kent. He is one honest man who has the best interest of the king at hand. I think it is interesting that the portion that we have so far read it seems Kent has been betrayed by his good honest nature. The reason the king banished him and the reason he was punished was because of his inability to tolerate dishonest people and it seems that these strength is as well his weakness.

P.s. I commented on becca's

What a Guy

While reading King Lear, one character who really stood out to me was Kent. As the story went on I really began to admire him for his loyalty and honesty. Even though it gets him into trouble, Kent remains an honest and outspoken character while remaining extremely loyal to King Lear the whole time. One of the most amazing things to me was how he disguised himself after being banished by King Lear so that he could go on serving him. This made me think of Psalm 84:10- "Better is one day in your courts than a thousand elsewhere; I would rather be a doorkeeper in the house of my God than dwell in the tents of the wicked." Although not quite the same, Kent's mindset was something like this. That is what I found to be so admirable about him, that he was so loyal to King Lear that he would rather be a servant to him than go on living anywhere else.

PS I commented on Molly's "Bad Rulers"

Know Your Audience

Since class of Tuesday, I have thought a lot about Julius Caesar.  It never once occurred to me before that the tragedy was actually the fall of Rome, and this intrigued me. I can't help but relate this to the modern world.  With the rapid improvements in technology in the past few decades, information an ideas spread more quickly than ever.  This is not the world our parents grew up it, and many of the  views on morality, justice, and truth are significantly different from what we were taught, especially those of us who grew up in Christian homes.  The world is changing.  The question is, are we still speaking like Brutus spoke to the Romans?  Do we really know our audience, or do we just think we do?

PS, Commented on Molly's "Bad Rullers" 

We should all just stab Caesar!

Brutus is a really impressive guy. He is great friends with Caesar yet a dedicated Roman citizen. He cared so much for his country that he voluntarily gave up his friendship and his friend for the sake of his country. Brutus’s ability to compartmentalize is so impressive. The fact that he can put down his own interests for the sake of his country is a quality most leaders lack. He is a far better leader than Caesar who seems to only be in it for his own personal power gain.  

I commented on Jasmine's

Friends, Romans, Honors bloggers.....

I thoroughly enjoy the play Julius Caesar, and the way that Shakespeare makes all of the characters real to people.  When the Brutus and Antony speak at the funeral, I believe that it shows a huge part of Roman society.  The main way to gain power in Rome was through oratory, and that is the one thing that sways the crowd throughout this play.  It's almost disgusting how fickle the common people of Rome are, as they are constantly swayed by one speech after another.  Throughout the speeches of Antony and Brutus we see this most strikingly, but before that we see the fickleness from the fight and win over Pompey, the convincing of Brutus, and every other scene involving the commoners.

P.S. Commented on Danielle's

Tragic Hero?

In class it was suggested by Dr. Abernathy, I believe, that Brutus is not the tragic hero in Julius Caesar, but that the true tragic hero is the whole society of Rome.  We blamed the people for first raising up Caesar who they thought would take care of them, but them choosing the Senate who promised freedom.  Personally, I do not think it is right to blame the Roman citizens.  They are only interested in what will help them the most in life, almost like Americans today.  Personally, if a monarchy was the government that promised the most for myself and other citizens, I would be all for it!  Plato him says that the best government possible is one with one perfect leader who rules over everyone.  I believe that the biggest problem in Julius Caesar is that it is government is fighting within itself.  The people are ready to go for whatever will be best, but the people in charge can't stop killing each other.

I commented on Jannah's post.

-Susan Berner

Frustration

Class was fun today, and it was interesting reading some classic Shakespeare.  To be completely honest, i've never read Shakespeare before, so this was very new to me.  He has some incredible skill in detailing speech within a text.  Briefly we spoke upon a certain speech that Edmund spoke during the story.  The speech was fueled by his frustration of being a "bastard" son. The speech is thought provoking and complex in emotion. Edmund states in scene two,

 "Legitimate Edgar, I must have your land: Our father's love is to the bastard Edmund As to the legitimate: fine word,--legitimate! Well, my legitimate, if this letter speed, And my invention thrive, Edmund the base Shall top the legitimate. I grow; I prosper: Now, gods, stand up for bastards!"

This blog for me is simply a question, what does Edmund really want. Out of the two acts we read this was a driving question for me.  It seems that he simply wants revenge for some kind, or is he trying to make some kind of point. In class we spoke of the various characters, who, would hide themselves under false persona's for the possible reason that they could not show their true selves. Is Edmund speaking against the facade that these characters put up?  Is there a major secret of these royal characters that we do not know about? I know my question is very simple, but it is left unanswered because it seems that we did not reach a legitimate conclusion in class. Tell me what you think!

P.S. I commented on Jasmine's "Why not Cordelia?"

King Lear's Fatal Flaw...

I still am not sure what to think about King Lear. I believe that in Act 1 Scene 1 he acted rashly, in reaction to a hurt plan or pride. This makes the the situation in Act 2 with his two older daughters even worse--for not only does he lack the previous authority he held, but they already have grounds to call him senile and dismiss him. His greatest mistake was the rash dismissal of the two most honest people in his life: Cordelia and Kent. After that, I think it causes him to become confused, for not only is there so much deception going on around him (from the supposedly honest people as well as from the two older manipulative daughters), but he is unable to gain authority to correct his wrongs. He perhaps hasn't realized what he has done wrong yet, but perhaps later he will.



I commented on Jasmine's.

Why not Cordelia?

I really do not understand why the king sent Cordelia away. She was his favorite daughter and the better of the three. I do not understand why he could not have just given the other two sister the far portions of England and still have given Cordelia the middle. The love test was not even necessary or even logical because he knows the oldest two sisters do not genuinely love him, but Cordelia does. The whole situation just does not make any sense to me.


Ps I commented in katelyn ewings blog

The Love Test

Today we spent time talking about why King Lear put his children through a test to prove their love. One response was, just like Knights have to prove their loyalty to the King, Lear wanted his daughters to prove their loyalty by flattering and praising him. While this may have acted as a formality, I do not think any daughter should have to prove her love to her father. I know it was mentioned that Cordelia's response was a pretty stupid one, but I think I would have responded the same way if I was in her situation. Love is not proved through words it is proved by obedience which is what Cordelia points out: 

"You have begot me, bred me, loved me. I 

Return those duties back as are right fit—

Obey you, love you, and most honor you."

Cordelia has proved her love to her father her whole life, unlike her sisters, which is more important than words spoken just to get the biggest portion of the kingdom. Cordelia is also telling her father the truth while her older sisters are clearly lying which is also what Cordelia points out:

"Why have my sisters husbands if they say
They love you all? Haply when I shall wed
That lord whose hand must take my plight shall carry
Half my love with him, half my care and duty.
Sure, I shall never marry like my sisters,
To love my father all."

Cordelia points out that if her sisters truly love their father as much as they say, then they do not actually love their own husbands. While King Lear disowns Cordelia, I think I would have given her the bigger portion for what she says. She speaks truthfully and obviously loves her father more than her sisters, which he know. Unfortunately, he let's his pride get in the way and winds up going completely insane when his supposed most loving daughters will not let him live with either one of them.

p.s. commented on Dylan Copeland's Mr. King do you mind?

Bad Rulers..

In class we discussed whether or not Caesar was a bad ruler, and came to the conclusion that he was not a bad ruler, just a bad Roman ruler.  But speaking as a citizen of any state, a ruler that does not fit the specifications of the office that they hold is a bad ruler. So in general Caesar may have been perfectly fit to rule, minus his obvious love of power, just not Rome. It would be similar to trying to force the United States into a sense of monarchy; those dedicated to the old system would reject it. John Locke wrote on the role of government, and his theory is that the government exists at the consent of the people with the purpose to protect the rights of the people that it represents. This is what truly caused the problem in Rome; the people were split in what they wanted. Rome was caught up in between the old republic and the new dictatorship of sorts.

We're Going Dowwwwwwnnnnnn!

So I was pretty much intrigued by Shakespeare's use of The People in Julius Caesar.  He let a seemingly insignificant group of people represent a very important thematic element, which was not a revolutionarily "new" idea, but the subtlety with which he did so was clever.  In the midst of these two men who are delivering very memorable speeches, Shakespeare discreetly unveils the true tragedy: the corrupt hearts of The People.  This tragedy would seem to pale in comparison to the loss of the great Julius Caesar, but as we learned in class, further examination revealed how The People were the driving force of the entire plot. Interesting...

P.S. I commented on Gary Hamner's "BRUTUS!!"

Brutus and Portia

    So what can I say, I'm a sucker for the romance scenes. However, the scene in Julius Caesar wear we are introduced to Portia, is my absolute favorite. Portia and Brutus share a strong bond and he deeply cares for her.  As does Portia for him. I think, really, this was another reason why Brutus was driven to continue in the plot to assassinate Caesar.  He wanted to fight for freedom of Roman citizens, Caesar was a monarch not a Senator, he was bringing an end to the Republic.  Now I have kinda jumped of the track. My point was suppose to be Portia was something Brutus was fighting for he wanted his family to live in safety and freedom from a tyrant's reign. You can see that this is true, because after the assassination, Brutus' revolt starts decaying after he hears that Portia is dead. With her, dies his hopes and dreams for future where Roman citizens could survive and live in freedom of a Republic.  Brutus is the last true Roman, and died so, never conquered by Monarchy or Tyranny. He controlled his fate.

P.S. commented on Gary's post.

A Certain Fool...

The Fool had to have been called that for a reason - someone saw him as being foolish. But, we find that he thought the king should not have sent away Cordelia - something I think we all agree with! King Lear, on the other hand, had given his kingdom to mean daughters, banished one of his best supporters, and disinherited the only daughter that really cared about him. The Fool saw something in Cordelia that the king did not. It seems like the real fool in this story is our dear title character - King Lear himself.

P.S. I commented on Dylan Copeland's post.

I Will Sing the Praises of the Bard

Cordelia is my absolute favorite character in King Lear. She truly does love her father. Her sisters give fake vows of love while Cordelia’s is honest. When her father banishes her by marrying her off to France, she accepts, even though she obviously wishes to stay with her father. However, my favorite actions of her come later on, but since we only read Acts 1&2 for today, more on Cordelia next week!

King Lear may be my favorite one of Shakespeare’s tragedies. All the characters are magnificently written and every one of them is magnificently human. They all have flaws, some which constitute as tragic flaws. The fool is brilliant and wise, ironically enough. Though most of Shakespeare’s fools were that way!

Tantum e tenebris receptum constabit,

Meghan

PS: Please pray for my family right now. My father’s brother has a brain tumor and has been given six months. My mother’s father has lung cancer which has spread to other parts of his body and he is in the ICU right with pneumonia and breathing problems.

PPS: I commented on Dylan’s post “Mr. King, do you mind?”

Mr. King, do you mind?

This is probably one of my least favorite Shakespeare plays that I have read so far. Although it is entertaining at some points, it nonetheless irritated me that King Lear was foolish enough to make the decisions that he did. Of course, in most Shakespeare plays, there is always those people (or protagonists as we might call them) that can cause me to love and then hate them within a matter of seconds. In this story, I never really became interested in the King Lear's character. I cannot comprehend how you do not understand your own daughters. I realize that he was the king, who probably never associated with his children much, but how dreadful it seems to me to not even know the true character of your own children!

Like we said in class, maybe King Lear was insane. If so, then he needed to be killed for the sake of the country. If he lived, then maybe the country would suffer more.

P.S. I commented on Gary Hamner's "BRUTUS!!"

BRUTUS!!

     Julius Caesar was the first Shakespeare play I have read and it was very interesting. The whole aspect of Brutus being more devoted to his country than his friend is something that grabbed my interest instantly. I imagine that is the case because I am going to be serving our country in not to long, I consider myself to be a very patriotic person so I can relate to Brutus really easily and if I was put in the same position as Brutus I probably would have done the same thing. I believe it takes a very dedicated person to do what Brutus did, but I don't think that means he didn't love Caesar as a friend, it just means that he loved his country, and even more the ideals that his country was based upon.  

Poor Judgement

A main theme of King Lear that we disgusted in class today was the idea of the King's poor judgement. I happen to think this is a really important matter. I believe that knowing someone's true character is really necessary for having a healthy relationship with them. The idea that King Lear might not have even really known his daughters very well is really sad to me. I think there is something to be said for fathers who actually take the time to know their kids. I think King Lear's biggest downfall could've been the fact that he was too trusting. If you trust people too much, you will start to let your guard down, and then they can deceive you easier. It is really important not to be paranoid and distant from everyone, but at the same time, you should never be blinded to the truth of someone's character, especially when they are close to you.

I haven't commented on anyone's post yet because my computer says no one else has posted this week yet... :)