May 12 - The Belle's Stratagem, 2nd Half -- Group B

1) Act 4.1 is the masquerade scene, which is all-important to the plots. Not only is the main plot advanced, but also the sub-plot. Comment on one detail from this involved, complex scene. OR, pose a question. There’s a lot of potential confusion, so there’s no shame in posing a straightforward / practical question.

or

2) In 5.2, Doricourt tells Saville that he’d offer Old Hardy the following: “the moiety of the estate which he [old Hardy] will forfeit shall be his the next moment by deed of gift.” What does he mean? Discuss this in relation to the betrothal of Doricourt and Letitia Hardy.

or

3) 5.5 is the final scene of denouement, and there’s lots to talk about in this scene. Here are just a few things you could discuss:
  - Doricourt’s feigning madness (in this scene and elsewhere)
  - Letitia’s big moment: she gets to say both “know to your confusion …” (5.5.220-223) and also “This is the most awful moment of my life” (5.5.260).
  - The off-scene marriage, which happens at some point after 5.5.88 and before 5.5.168. (How exactly are we to take this?)
  - “Rapture! Transport! Heaven!” (5.5.267). Is there any way to play this sincerely? Or, conversely, maybe these lines must be played sincerely?

or

4) Discuss another part of today’s reading that seems to be in need of exploration, elucidation, or comment.

May 10 - The Belle's Stratagem, first half -- Group B

1) What do you think about the chauvinism in the early scenes of this play? (Look it up: “chauvinism” doesn’t originally or primarily mean sexism.) For example, examine what Doricourt has to say about the English, French, and Italians in 1.3.16-55, or what he says a moment later about English, French, and Italian ladies.

or

2) Examine Lady Frances’s choice at the end of 2.1. What does she decide? How is her choice presented to her by Mrs. Racket and Miss Ogle? By Sir George? What about the perspective of Lady Frances herself?

or

3) Letitia’s manner of speaking at 3.1.90-160 makes for a key scene in the play, and in her “belle’s stratagem.” First say what she’s doing, and then look at an example or two of her speech style in this moment. Does she get her intended reaction? How do we know?

or

4) Discuss another part of today’s reading that seems to be in need of exploration, elucidation, or comment.

May 5 - Cato - further discussion - Group A

1) Cato’s speech at the beginning of act 5 is an interesting and complex one. In part, it’s a contemplation of suicide, but a very different one from Hamlet’s. Examine one or more of Cato’s statements about suicide and / or immortality. Is it a guess? A conviction?

or

2) The lines “let fierce contending nations know / What dire effects from civil discord flow” (5.4.107-8) seems to be rather prescient, given the civil wars / rebellions that occurred at the end of the 18^th century in France and the British colonies / America. What do you think this play has to say about liberty and freedom? Do you think its place in Enlightenment political thought is deserved?

or

3) Discuss another part of today’s reading that seems to be in need of exploration, elucidation, or comment.

May 3 - Cato acts 3-5 - Group A

1) Take a look at Cato’s reaction to his son Marcus’s death: “I’m satisfied” and his statement that he wants to “view at leisure / The bloody corse, and count those glorious wounds” (4.4.66, 78-79). How do you think we’re meant to react to Cato here? And how did you react?

or

2) What are your impressions of the romantic plots, particularly when they come to crisis point at 4.1 – 4.3? You can comment on either what actually happens during these scenes, or on the style adopted by this play, especially in its language. Does it seem different than, say, All for Love or Oroonoko?

or

3) What do you make of the epilogue? Is it consistent with the rest of the play? Or is it jarring? It was written by a different author, and epilogues are often meant to serve as a transition point between the fictional world of the play and the real world of people in the theater watching the play. Does this epilogue serve as that transition point?

or

4) Discuss another part of today’s reading that seems to be in need of exploration, elucidation, or comment.

School for Scandal, Reviews, and Seeing Plays

This will serve as an all-purpose post about seeing plays, reviewing plays, our class's trip to see School for Scandal, and whatever else fits into it. There's no requirement to comment on this post; it's just there in case anyone wants to vent, discuss, ask questions, provide answers, and so forth.

Info on School for Scandal: 

We're on for Tuesday, May 3 at 7:30 p.m. Dr. Z has the tickets and will distribute them at LCW on Tuesday. Please make sure you bring $30 to LCW on May 3. Dr. Z will then do his best to get the reimbursement money pledged by the Dean / LCW, hopefully for $20 per ticket.
 
  - also, based on what students have said about being able to go or not, we should have two extra tickets, available also for $30 each, which are to be made available to LCW students on a first-come, first-served basis. So please try to get a friend to come to the play! If you know of someone who will be able to commit to going, please let Dr. Z know immediately.

Info on play-going and review-writing in general:

First, here's a short comedic piece from The Toast about seeing plays. It's called "So You're Thinking About Seeing a Play." (If you don't know about The Toast, and particularly its pieces on art, you should. Some of them are hilarious.) It's sort of about seeing plays, and sort of about what plays are, but it's also apparently about what it's like when your friend is a playwright, or if you yourself are a playwright.
http://the-toast.net/2016/04/14/plays-for-normal-people/

And here are some examples of reviews of plays. These will get you in the mood to write an extra-credit review of S for S, and will show you how the professionals write reviews. They have to deal with word limits, so they try to get as much as possible into short a text as possible. So they often use sentences like, "The parade of extravagant costumes, by Constance Hoffman, brings a colorful injection of visual drama to the proceedings, too." Or phrases like "played with foot-stomping exasperation by Patrice Johnson Chevannes" and "Mr. Camargo’s pale, darkly expressive face" -- in other words, descriptions for an audience who have not seen the play, using vivid (but brief) language to convey the experience in snapshots rather than wholly covering everything exhaustively.
  
- the above examples are from http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/26/theater/review-in-pericles-much-ado-about-a-lot-of-things.html -- a review of a recent performance of Pericles

  - and here's a somewhat older review of a performance of The Rover
  http://www.nytimes.com/1987/07/27/theater/stage-the-rover-feminist-comedy-from-1677.html -- it apparently had Christopher Reeve (who played Superman in the late 1970s and 1980s) as Willmore

April 19 - Cato acts 1-2 - Group A

1) Perhaps more than any other play we’ve studied this semester, Cato is a play of ideas. Briefly discuss one idea or debate that comes up in the first two acts. For example, 1.4, when Syphax and Juba debate the merits of the Roman ways.

or

2) Who wins the debate about war vs. peace (2.1)? What do you think about the debate and the outcome?

or

3) “In pitying love we but our weakness show” (from the prologue). How does Addison make good on this in the early action? Or are there romantic situations which do in fact inspire pity?

or

4) Discuss another part of today’s reading that seems to be in need of exploration, elucidation, or comment.