FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   13   14   15   16   17   18   19   20   21   22   23   24   25   26   27   28   29   30   31   32   33   34   35   36   37  
38   39   40   41   42   43   44   45   46   47   48   49   50   51   52   53   54   55   56   57   58   59   60   61   62   >>   >|  
effect of the Induction in dramatic presentation is not easy to estimate. Since there is no direct connection between it and the Play itself what do you see that it could be made to do for the action? Is it like a frame for a picture adapted to give the theme remoteness? Is this appropriate? Is it otherwise a mere cause for confusion? Or is it intended to add one more thread of amusement? Why does Shakespeare in "The Shrew" drop the tinker interregnum dialogue recurring regularly in "A Shrew?" May Shakespeare, therefore, be cited as finding only a limited use for "the Play outside the Play," deeming it in the way later? How has he arranged for its gradual disappearance from attention? Is there a stage reason alone enough to account for it? (See suggestions in Notes on I, i, 266, and IV, iii, i, "First Folio Edition"). Compare the Tinker scenes in the version of 1594. (For these see Extracts in Sources, pp. 105-110, in "First Folio Edition"). Do the Slie of "A Shrew" and Christophero Sly of "The Shrew" differ as characters? As to their opinion of the Play: Are their between-the-act dialogues materially different? What is the relation to the source and what has been altered from the old tale. The local Warwickshire touches in the Induction and their explanation. (For these see "Story of the Induction" in the Play). QUERIES FOR DISCUSSION Ought the Induction play to be left out? How might it be made more effective by special treatment on the stage? Should the additional scenes be interpolated as was the stage custom, or should Shakespeare's diminishing notice of them be adopted to produce the most artistic effect? II THE DOUBLE PLOT OF THE MAIN PLAY In "A Shrew" and "The Shrew": Show how the story, with respect to the Taming scenes, is the same substantially, with comparatively minor differences, except for the characterization. But with respect to the Bianca scenes it has been expanded and altered. This suggests, most naturally, that the part Shakespeare did not write or answer for in "A Shrew" was merely the Bianca scenes, and that his task in "The Shrew" was to cut out and rewrite the scenes that were not his so as to be unhampered with the disharmony of the two parts of the plot as it appears in the Quarto of 1594. The story of the Play as it now stands consists of an interweaving of the Taming story and the story of Bianca's Courtship in such a way that while they keep their separateness of neces
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   13   14   15   16   17   18   19   20   21   22   23   24   25   26   27   28   29   30   31   32   33   34   35   36   37  
38   39   40   41   42   43   44   45   46   47   48   49   50   51   52   53   54   55   56   57   58   59   60   61   62   >>   >|  



Top keywords:
scenes
 

Shakespeare

 
Induction
 

Bianca

 
effect
 
Edition
 
altered
 

respect

 

Taming

 

diminishing


artistic

 

produce

 

notice

 

adopted

 

special

 

QUERIES

 

DISCUSSION

 

explanation

 

Warwickshire

 

touches


Should

 

additional

 

interpolated

 

custom

 
treatment
 
DOUBLE
 

effective

 

appears

 

Quarto

 

disharmony


unhampered

 
rewrite
 
stands
 

separateness

 

consists

 

interweaving

 

Courtship

 

substantially

 

comparatively

 
differences

answer
 
naturally
 

suggests

 

characterization

 
expanded
 

Extracts

 

thread

 

amusement

 

confusion

 
intended