Pages

Showing posts with label Love and Marriage. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Love and Marriage. Show all posts

Tuesday, April 12, 2011

Final Hub: Wrapping up Shakespeare and the Family



Focus:
My research focus started out as a filial analysis on Shakespeare's works. Once I realized "filial" was specific to parent-child relationship I thought I'd broaden my research to a familial analysis of Shakespeare. But then it felt too broad and overwhelming so I broke the familial analysis into five parts and then shortened it to three:

  • Love & Marriage
  • Tragedy in the Family
  • Filial: Parent-child Relationship 

Finally, when it boiled down to the wrapping up of the blog, I realized what my focused had turned into: Shakespeare and tragedy in the family. This focus encompasses some of his plays, biological information about Shakespeare's own life, and how responses to tragedy parallel between the modern family and the Elizabethan family


Thesis:
Familial relationships in Shakespeare's works parallel directly with his own life and the views of the time. I argue that the Elizabethan familial relationships are the same as today, and that we can use these relationships portrayed in Shakespeare's literature as tools to learn from the pitfalls and successes. 


Support/Evidence:
First, I began learning about the life of Shakespeare in Michael Wood's documentary "In Search of Shakespeare" and wrote about Shakespeare as a son, husband, and father in one, two, three and four parts.
Then I researched Elizabethan marriage in Bruce Young's Family Life in the Age of Shakespeare. I wrote about the three types of marriage in Elizabethan times that are illustrated in A Midsummer Night's Dream:  love, lust and companionate.
Next, I wrote about how families are central to most of Shakespeare's tragedies. Shakespeare used tragedy as a way to illustrate the values of family and how the bonds are strengthened through adversary. I referred to modern examples of tragedies that affect the family like the shooting in Brazil and the earthquake/tsunami in Japan. I also referred back to the biographical research I wrote about on Shakespeare and how when his son, Hamnet, died Shakespeare responded by mending the relationship he had with his father.
Shakespeare also illustrated through some of his plays that tragedies can tear families a part. Tragedy in Hamlet is a result of "family feelings" and Hamlet being forced to internalize those feelings. I mentioned a psychological study that concluded young people have a higher risk of suicide attempt when they've experience the death of a biological parent. Shakespeare also demonstrated how tragedy can further detriment a family had an affair after his son, Hamnet's, early death.
Finishing my research focus with King Lear, I discussed how King Lear actually portrays the ideal filial relationship. I used the example of Lear and his daughter, Cordelia's, reconciliation through repentance, forgiveness and unconditional love.


Conclusion:
Shakespeare's illustration of the family not only reflects Elizabethan society but modern society as well. Focusing on subjects such as tragedy, Shakespeare's characters become timeless and their issues hauntingly familiar. Because Shakespeare experienced tragedy in his family first-hand--a failure of father, a gun-shot possibly love-less marriage, and the death of a young child---his characters are genuine and their experiences are real. We can learn from much of what Shakespeare illustrates about families in his, plays, their successes and their failures. 


Sunday, April 3, 2011

Pre-Hub Hub

"hubs" via here

To be honest, I was a little shocked when Dr. Burton announced on Wednesday that we needed to write a hub post for Monday. I was planning on another week, at least, of posts that would further develop my focus of familial Shakespeare! Thankfully I was able to talk to Dr. Burton after class and share my anxiety. I told him that this hub post would not be filled with very many links or as developed since I hadn't planned for a hub post so soon, but he told me that it was fine and that this was more of a chance to get things going. Phew! I thought Mandy's hub-post was clearly formatted and informative but not intimidating, so I will follow her example with a few changes.


Focus:
I began my focus on the familial Shakespeare. I decided this was too broad to write about with each post so I broke it into 5 parts which I have now shortened to 3:


  • Love & Marriage
  • Tragedy in the Family
  • Filial: Parent-child Relationship
Within each category is Shakespeare's own biographical information, historical information of the time, an in-depth analysis of the topic in one of Shakespeare's plays, and how it relates to the modern family.

Thesis: 
Familial relationships in Shakespeare's works parallel directly with his own life and the views of the time. I argue that the Elizabethan familial relationships are the same as today, and that we can use these relationships portrayed in Shakespeare's literature as tools to learn from the pitfalls and successes. 

Support/Evidence:
  • First, I began learning about the life of Shakespeare in Michael Wood's documentary "In Search of Shakespeare" and wrote about him as a son, husband, and father in one, twothree and four parts.
  • Then I started 1 of the 3 sections I am focusing on within my topic by researching Elizabethan marriage in Bruce Young's Family Life in the Age of Shakespeare. I wrote about the three types of marriages in Elizabethan times that are illustrated in A Midsummer Night's Dream.
  • Next will be Tragedy in the Family with a close analysis of Hamlet. I will compare the reaction of families to tragedy in Elizabethan and modern times.
  • Finally, I will spend the majority of my time analyzing filial relationships within King Lear. This was the beginning inspiration for my familial focus so I think it is appropriate to end where I began.

Tuesday, March 29, 2011

Love, Lust and Companionate Marriage

After learning about marriage during the time of Shakespeare I was interested to see how this was reflected in his work. I've always enjoyed that A Midsummer Night's Dream ended happily in marriage, but was taken aback this time around by the sorrow I felt for Helena. There is something disturbing and ironic about Helena and Demetrius' marriage and I think that Shakespeare had more to say about marriage in A Midsummer Night's Dream than any other of his plays. Shakespeare uses three examples in this play to show the driving forces of marriage during his time: love, lust, and companionate arrangement. 


Hermia & Lysander
Hermia & Lysander are examples of marrying for love. I think Shakespeare was quite the romantic and the new wave of marrying for love during his time was something he embraced. The relationship between these two characters is Shakespeare's ideal--defying the conventions of the times (fully aware of being punished with death by braking an arranged marriage), running off to be together (followed by the probable consequence of poverty), and motivated by love and the desire to be life-long companions. While no ones relationship is perfect (Lysander lusts after Helena at one point) together they stand the test of temptation and rejection. With Hermia and Lysander you feel a sense of commitment, romance, and excitement. Their relationship seems more sensible, real and complex--more human. 










Unrequited love




With Helena & Demetrius Shakespeare shows us that marrying for love can be dangerous, as love is often mistaken for lust. We can relate with this in our own day as choosing a spouse based heavily on love is more than prevalent. Shakespeare illustrates that love should not be the only factor in marriage, especially when love is so easily confused with the "spell" of infatuation.   You can't help but feel sorry for poor Helena the entire play, especially when she does end up marrying Demetrius!  How long will the spell on Demetrius last? How many marriages begin like that and after the infatuation has ended they find themselves stuck in the bonds of matrimony? Shakespeare must have faced the same problems in his world that we face today.


Theseus & Hippolyta are examples of the arranged marriage, but both of them seemed to have consented to it so that would make it fit better into the companionate marriage. 

The modern definition

The marriage seems to be driven by wealth, power, and lust. I believe this would be Shakespeare's illustration of marriage in aristocracy during the Elizabethan era. I also think this is the most disdainful marriage in the eyes of Shakespeare because of the following passage in the last act of A Midsummer Night's Dream. Theseus & Hippolyta wonder about the events in the forest that happened the night before. Theseus dismisses it but Hippolyta trails off with an interesting thought.


HIPPOLYTA: 'Tis strange, my Theseus, that these lovers speak of.

THESEUS: More strange than true. I never may believe
These antique fables nor these fairy toys.
Lovers and madmen have such seething brains,
Such shaping fantasies, that apprehend

More than cool reason ever comprehends.
The lunatic, the lover, and the poet
Are of imagination all compact.
One sees more devils than vast hell can hold—
That is the madman. The lover, all as frantic,
Sees Helen’s beauty in a brow of Egypt.
The poet’s eye, in fine frenzy rolling,
Doth glance from heaven to Earth, from Earth to heaven.
And as imagination bodies forth
The forms of things unknown, the poet’s pen
Turns them to shapes and gives to airy nothing
A local habitation and a name.
Such tricks hath strong imagination,
That if it would but apprehend some joy,
It comprehends some bringer of that joy.
Or in the night, imagining some fear,
How easy is a bush supposed a bear!

HIPPOLYTA: And all their minds transfigured so together,
More witnesseth than fancy’s images
And grows to something of great constancy,
But, howsoever, strange and admirable.


I believe Hippolyta's last words came directly from the mouth of Shakespeare. He admits that love may be seen as crazy and exaggerated but it is not so irrational as it may seem. Actually, although, in A Midsummer Night's Dream, the lover's experiences with love range from rash & fantastical to pure & undeterred it's consistent with and spans across the vast human experience of love. And love, whether it ends with a committed marriage or sorrow is still more admirable than a safety net of a calculated marriage. 



Sunday, March 27, 2011

Elizabethan Marriage

I've spent a lot of time learning about Shakespeare and establishing a basic understanding of his life as a play write and more specifically a son, husband, father, lover and active participant in a family-based society. This week I am focusing on the marriage & love aspect of familial Shakespeare. I turned to the book Family Life in the Age of Shakespeare by Bruce Young to research historical information about marriage in the Elizabethan era. I was surprised to find that what I previously thought about marriage in Shakespeare's time--female inferiority, arranged & teenage marriages--was, generally, incorrect.

Bruce Young introduces the topic of Elizabethan marriage with the finding that "Most historians conclude that love and friendship were essential elements of English marriages throughout the entire early modern period [Renaissance]" (44).

Men and women mingled with relative freedom and there wasn't usually a wide age gap between husbands and wives. Most brides & grooms were in their twenties, although the age of consent was 14 for boys and 12 for girls. The average age of marriage in aristocracy was 19-21 women, 24-26 for men, but for most classes is was higher. The average age of marriage in England through the 1500-1600s was 25-26 for women and 27-28 for men (41).



There were formal courting standards of getting the approval of a woman's parents before trying to "woo" her, but dating was also much like it is today--meeting through friends, getting acquainted over dinner, going out to social gatherings. Falling in love was a "common precursor to marriage". Women weren't always passive about it either. Dr. Young states that both men and women were active in choosing a spouse. Wealth was a factor but "virtue, shared belief and a capacity for harmony and love were supposed to be given greater weight" (38)

The engagement or "betrothal" was taken almost as seriously as marriage. There were ceremonies of betrothal much like the marriage ceremonies of our days: taking each other by the hand, making promises and even sometimes exchanging rings. Marriage was religiously based--as most aspects in life were during this time--so divorce was non-existent. Even broken engagements were looked down upon and sometimes they would even prevent future marriage (40).

Arranged marriages were rare and legally invalid if either the bride or groom did not give consent (35).
Besides this law, most parents were very involved with "helping" to choose the spouse of their child because their view of "kinship" at the time actively involved both sides of the family. In Elizabethan era "marrying the family" really was the case (36). Although there was no marrying within the family, or at least no close relatives. 

Elizabethan wedding dress
A typical marriage ceremony included the exchange of wedding bands, as today. During the ceremony the priest would state 3 reasons for marriage: "the procreation of children to be brought up in the fear and nurture of the Lord", "to avoid fornication", "for the mutual society, help and comfort" of the couple (40). We can see in these three reasons that marriage wasn't just a love affair, nor was it just a business affair. Marriage was a duty, a religious commitment, a comfort & joy and also held high importance to society. Family was central to the Elizabethan society as their identity rested upon community not individuality (29). I wonder if growing up in such a close knit community was the reason Shakespeare was so adept to the universal nature of humans?

Marriage was monogamous and romantically seen as a way to connect an individual to the past and future. Also, around this time surnames were fully established, which is an important addition to marriage. I wonder if we would feel as united, and committed as couples without having the same last name? Maybe that is just my romantic side coming through, but I think there is weight to surnames being established during this point in time. It must've had some effect on marriage.

What I enjoyed reading most about marriage was that while the idea of man as the domineering head of the house was prominent, there were many also many beliefs of men and women as "complementary", "partners", and essentially equal (42). I believe this is something that gave root to romance and love-based-marriages during the time. Of course, there is also evidence of what is called "companionate marriage"--a marriage that is more "calculated" than driven by love (44). I think there is evidence in Shakespeare's plays of all the different types of marriage in his time--companionate, lustful, and a sincere loving marriage. My next post will be on A Midsummer Night's Dream and how Shakespeare illustrates these three types of marriage, their benefits & their follies.