Act V Commentary

Scene 1

The prologue to the play is hilariously silly. I was chuckling through it all. The plot is completely exposed and done so it such a false, grandoise way. It really was a mockery of the "simpleness" of the actors.

The play is funny in and of itself. How many times can a dying actor say "die" before they actually do so???

The nice, rounded ending of all the fairies "blessing" the new marriages fully completes the story. For a comedy, it is the right kind of gentle and peaceful tranquility, not side-splitting humor, to close it all out. It just seemed right to me. And of course, it couldn't end without a reference to the dream nature of it all.

Act IV Commentary

Scene 1

This is more than comedy. This is absurdity. A queen fairy stroking a donkey-headed human, who revels in it all and starts making demands of the attendant fairies?! I can't wait to see this performed!

Once Titania and Oberon were dancing, I wasn't actually sure whether they were dancing to wake the four sleeping lovers or dancing while they slept. Cliffs' commentary set me straight: dancing while they slept, marking a harmonious reunion.

I found it a little beyond comedic to read the several speeches between Theseus and Hippolyta regarding the sound of the hunting hounds. While reading, it seemed to me that Hippolyta's description of hearing them is quite put on, rather like the emphasis one uses when they are madly in love with someone. Surely this is the purpose. They are to be married very shortly.

Here we see many references to "dreams." Each of the characters that awakes wonders if it was all a dream, but is not sure. Surely, it would be easier to believe if it were.

Scene 2

During my first reading, I didn't quite understand that these "actors" were expecting added money for their performance, since now two additional couples were to be married at the same ceremony. They were upset at losing out on such rewards, since Bottom hadn't returned yet.

Act III Commentary

Okay, I know I'm pushing, but I want to be done before Sunday afternoon. I have an incentive. We are going to see it performed for Father's Day.

Scene 1

While reading this, the humor of their fumbling practice session was lost on me. But after looking back over it, and actually imagining some real stumbling around on stage by real actors, I can envision how truly funny this could be. I guess this is why these plays actually get acted out!

It is quite ridiculous to suggest that the actors announce that they only pretending to be their characters. This is obvious to everyone, except to these "actors." That is quite funny!

Scene 2

Oberon doesn't seem to be a cruel character (other than insisting he get the boy), but still he takes pleasure in hearing that his wife has fallen in love with a "monster." Puck's language is dramatic and expressive, which fits well with his character, and makes the idea of the match even funnier.

This scene seemed to be mostly a huge bickering session. Insults flying back and forth, name calling, and the threat of physical violence are all emphasized by the length of it all.

In true form, Puck enjoys watching and hearing the conflicted lovers argue and threaten each other. I liked the contrast shown between this attitude of Puck's and Oberon's, which was genuinely sorry for causing it all. Clearly, we won't have to wait long to see that "all shall be well."

Act II Commentary

Scene 1

The Cliffs Notes commentary pointed out that the language Shakespeare uses to describe the fairies' habitat conjures up beautiful images. I guess I see that now, but I didn't catch it on the first reading. I merely understood that the fairies dwell in the natural world. Forests, flowers, and fountains. Maybe I missed the explicit connection because I already think of these things as desirable.

Also pointed out is how the fairies and royalty are associated, in general, by Shakespeare's description. With a king, queen, and subjects (in addition to the description of the habitat resembling jewels and such), I guess this connection is somewhat obvious, but I didn't think of it in those terms while reading.

I enjoyed reading the fairy's description of Puck. Puck is such a lengendary character, but I guess I never really knew how so. Now I get it. He is blamed for things happening, when there is no other to blame. Kind of like Murphy. I didn't realize until later that he also goes by the name of "Robin Goodfellow." That was news to me.

Scene 2

Here, the commentary points out the changes in speech patterns. I guess I noticed some changes while reading, but didn't pay much attention. These speech patterns correlate with the pace of the action. Some are sleeping, some are running---constant contrasts. Another contrast is the mood of the various interactions of characters. Love, thwarted love, false love. Interesting.

Act I Commentary

I don't feel like I need much structure for this. I'll comment on what strikes me, you do the same, and we'll comment on each other's comments. The commentary provided by the Cliffs Notes is helpful for me, since I think it gives me some added insight.

I thought Act 1 went quite smoothly for me. I only have a few thoughts to share.

Scene 1

I missed catching the number of references to the moon. Apparently, this is significant. Most of the play (I guess I will figure this out by the time we finish) occurs during the night. Also, the high frequency of references to the moon indicates a relationship to Luna, the goddess of chastity. This is supposed to be reference to the societal requirement that the lovers remain chaste until marriage.

I could have guessed the chastity, given the time period, but I missed how the references to the moon pointed to this.

Scene 2

I found it interesting that the commentary I read pointed out the relationship between the names Shakespeare gives to the characters and the professions they have or the roles they will play in the performance they will be doing. For instance, "Flute" is to play a woman, and the flute signifies a high-pitched voice. Similar descriptive names were chosen for the other characters as well. Knowing this now will likely keep me from getting lost among characters within characters.

Act I, in general

I actually found Scene 1 easy to read. I relied on the footnotes only about 10% of the time. I found Scene 2 a little more difficult, mostly because the "Bottom" character often chooses the wrong word for what he is trying to express (clearly Shakespeare's intention). This is where the footnotes were very helpful.

I almost started Act II last night, but decided that would probably cloud or confuse these comments that I wanted to write this morning. I will start it tonight, most likely. Act II appears to be about the same length as Act I. I think I saw that Scene 2 of Act *III* is quite a bit longer than anything in Acts I or II. We might plan ahead for that.

It is possible that I may be able to finish all of Act II tonight, since it isn't very long... if I don't crash on the couch as soon as the kids are down.

Sounds good

I've read Act I, Scene I too. I picked up a copy of the play that comes with the modern English translation side by side with the play itself yesterday so I'll see if that makes reading Scene II any easier.

I think we can have scenes 1 & 2 read by the weekend and commented upon. Do you want to structure the comments in any particular way? Or just whatever comes to mind?

Act I, Scene 1

I finished Act I, Scene 1 and all the accompanying commentary on Sunday night. I've been a little tied up (and worn out) since then.

Should we set a schedule? Say, finish Act I by the end of the weekend and post any commentary/questions????

I guess I'd really like to have Act II finsihed by then.... How about you? Your schedule? No schedule?