King Lear and lack of compromise?
821586
King Lear is one of Shakespeare's greatest tragedies.   The whole play is about lack of compromise.  \n\nGoneril poisoned her sister Regan and then killed herself.  These sites should be quite helpful to you.  Best of luck with your work.
288581
... that's Shakespeare right, hes really hard to understand. but hes also pretty "deep" and makes some important social comments... stick with it.. as for me , I'll check back and see what you come up with..... i like hamlet... saw ALL the movie versions
690175
in this play,the mob were prbably fickle minded.they cud be easily instigated by anyone at any moment like brutus jusified    killing caesar.they easily believed him & the very next moment they were aroused against brutus by antony.it was the mob who were ultimately responsible 4 the downfall of brutus and cassius and hence is there significance.
444577
I'm teaching "Julius Caesar" right now to my 10th graders.\n\nCaesar--Killed Pompey and his sons.  He is loved by commoners.  He was offered the crown three times and refused three times (as a show of humility). He is superstitious and consults with augurers.  He is a fatalist (believes that he cannot fight fate).  He demonstrates hubris (excessive pride) frequently; "Danger knows full well that Caesar is more dangerous than he".  His dying words "Et tu Brute? Then fall Caesar" are famous and show his shock at Brutus's betrayal.  He also created the "spirit of Caesar" (the commoners' preference for an emporer rather than a republic).\n\nBrutus--the tragic hero of the play.  His tragic flaw is his tendency to trust people too much.  He is noble and patriotic and kills Caesar for the right reason.  Makes several errors throughout the play.   \n\nMark Antony--Caesar's nephew.  Crafty and manipulative.  A tyrant after Caesar's death.  Able to sway the crowds at Caesar's funeral.  \n\nCassius--provides the catalyst for Caesar's assassination.  He is hot-tempered, quick to anger, but also quick to cool down.  He is the voice of reason among the conspirators.  \n\nCasca--easily led.  Not too clever.  The first to stab Caesar.  \n\nPortia--Brutus's wife.  Considers herself Brutus's equal.  Stabs herself in the thigh to show Brutus that she can endure pain.  Kills herself by swallowing hot coals because she wants Brutus to come home.  \n\nCalpurnia--superstitious (she interprets her dream as a bad omen).  \n\nCicero--senator of Rome.  He is wise and well-spoken.  He is killed by the new triumvirate (Octavius, Antony, and Lepidus) after Caesar's death.  \n\nFavius/Marullus--supporters of Pompey.  They make the commoners feel guilty when they are awaiting Caesar's return after killing Pompey.  Remove the scarves and decorations from Caesar's statues and are killed because of doing so.
541138
Julius Caesar should have stopped at Act 3... but personal opinions aside... have you read Act 5?\n\nHave you read about all the bodies dropping onto their swords?  Does this surprise you?  Does this change your opinion of the men who thought they were killing Caesar to save their country?\n\nNot gonna do your homework for you.  If you're confused, try asking better questions.
886085
It's believed that Shakespeare was a cover for some else. He had no record of going to university or any school where he could have become that knowledgeable. Some one called Kit was meant to have written them. \n\nKit worked for the government, had the King make some university give him a degree, faked his death moved to Italy and sent plays about Italian society back to London.\n\nShakespeare was more of a director.
479841
Well, my friend did a paper about this actually and bent my ear about it. Basically what she said was Shakespear only had one Jew in his plays, and that was Shylock from the Merchant of Venice. and the answer she came up with was, maybe. there is not enough evidence to say one way or another if he was racist.
821670
G'day Kim,\n\nThank you for your question.\n\nIf it were me, I would compare and contrast the satirical approach to human nature of Voltaire's Candide and Swift's works Gullivers Travels and a Modest Proposal. (Please note that a Modest Proposal is by Swift not Milton).\n\nHaving said that, you are leaving it a bit late but hopefully you will be able to pull something together.\n\nI have attached sources for your reference.\n\nRegards
299843
I just completed a research paper for my 1002 class on MND. (Got a 98% on it, btw).  I used Puck as my subject.  Just think of it this way:  if Oberon had not asked Puck to go get the love juice out of the flower, and had done it all himself, then we would not have had the comic aspect of the play at all.  It would have been just another boring old play.  What I liked best about it was the ending scene when Puck addressed the audience.  He was basically telling them that if they did not like the play, not to worry about it because it was all just a dream.  Great play.
523601
Oscar Wilde!!! Love him! The Importance of Being Ernest! An Ideal Husband!\n\nBTW William Shakespeare.... 1564-1616. So, no!
164480
This question is posed at the lowest point in Hamlet's life; father dead (murdered by his uncle), mother marries the uncle, who then plots Hamlet's own death.\n\nTo be, or not to be, that is the question: \n\nthe question posed by Hamlet – a trained mind; the question posed by the play centrally itself. The infinitive form ‘To be’ and ‘not to be’ posits a single compelling choice: Being or Non-being. It is the most radical choice we can make, suicide. \n\nWhether ’tis nobler in the mind to suffer \nThe slings and arrows of outrageous fortune, \nOr to take arms against a sea of troubles \nAnd by opposing end them. \n\n\nThe question is re-expressed in terms of nobility of action; that is, whether it is nobler to endure or nobler to commit suicide. This is not a moral outlook. Rather it is chivalric as the metaphor ‘slings and arrows’ and the apparently mixed metaphor of taking up ‘arms against a sea of troubles’ suggests. The battle against ‘outrageous fortune’ is hopeless since it can marshal a ‘sea’ of force against which, as the mixed metaphor suggests, King Canute resistance is futile. However, by opposing one might successfully provoke one’s own destruction at fortune’s hands, which would end the matter honourably.
250009
john proctor - at first he was afraid to tell everyone that abigail told him it wasn't about witchcraft, because she told him when they were alone together and he had no way to prove it except for confessing his fornication, which he was hesitant to do.  after realizing the severity of the situation, he confessed, giving up his pride.  later in the play, he decides to sign his name and confess to being a witch to save his life, because his honesty is already broken, but then his pride refuses to let him sign his name, and he refuses to blacken the names of martha corey and rebecca nurse by confessing, and dies with them as an honest person.  john proctor's pride is at first a hinderance, and by the end of the play is a beneficial.\n\nabigail williams - less multi-dimentional than john proctor, her pride is a hinderance throughout the entire play.  her pride is hurt when john rejects her, and being what he calls a "lump of vanity", she retaliates by accusing people of withcraft, eventually calling the name of john's wife elizabeth in hopes of sentencing her to death and being with john.  even when she is directly accused of lying, she lashes out and plays it up even more.\n\nreverand hale - uses the idea of pride to try and convince john proctor to confess to witchcraft, saying "it may be that God punishes less the man who lies to save his life than he who throws it away for pride" (or something similar...i forget the exact quote).
645778
The stage itself hasnt really changed that much it's almost always ben wooden planks much like the deck of old wooden ships. it makes it easier to nail things to and set up props. As far as the overall setting where plays where performed in those days you have to remember that the only lighting was either candles or sunlight. This actually made makeup nad makeshift special affects much easier because of poor lighting. also VERY few females performed on stage at the time most of his plays where performed almost entirely by men. Although having read the majority of his plays i dont believe these things had a huge impact on what he was writing.
482775
In the 800's in your local library.Cliff notes at your local bookstore. At www.shakespeare.com. Good Luck
651521
Try sparknotes.com you may be able to find an analysis of the play.\n\nPesonally, I sometimes need the extra help because I don't know what Shakespheare is talking about.
568883
Well since Shakespere has a play out there called Henry V how about:\n\nTo Manipulate or Not to Manipulate, That is the question...
90841
1.  Shakespeare wrote plays, not novels, so it is much better to see them performed rather than read them (unless you are talking about sonnets)\n2.  The language is difficult, and most competing forms of entertainment require far less work.\n3.  If you notice how many of the questions here are written, you will notice that the chat room / e-mail / text messaging generation does not seem to relate to the written word in the same way that old folks like me do.\n4.  High school teachers aren't always well equipped to teach Shakespeare.  \n\nAll that aside, I have been amazed at how some adolescents absolutely love Shakespeare, despite all of those disadvantages.