Drama

Alex Moreno Theater 208 Comedy: Techniques behind the Laughter Comedy is the genre of film that makes even the saddest times bearable and gained a lot of popularity in a time when people needed a boost. Comedy is a unique form of film in its wide range of methods, and in all of these methods there is at least some of a select group of approaches. The true magic that comedy has arises from these select few techniques, that, when used properly, will never fail to generate a laugh.

Comedy comes in a wide range of forms, all of which bring a laugh in different ways. There are however, a few specific categories of comedy which become classics. The most effective of these include; screwball, running gags, wit, set-up and punch line, and slap stick. While these are separate categories of comedy, they are very often used together or in other types, to successfully generate a laugh. The question is, what makes them work over and over, and the answer lies in common factors of each technique.

An important factor in comedy is the script and use of dialogue. While dialogue is not equally important in all types of comedy, it is still a very effective tool in producing a great comedy. The dialogue must tie in fast pacing, wit, and comedy in order to keep an audience entertained, all while following the script in order to draw the audience in to the film, and keep them hooked. Great comedies always have exceptional dialogue that can make even the most ordinary scene, absolutely hilarious.

When dialogue is used properly, it can be comedy in itself, or add to another joke. An example of this is when a main character makes a funny comment about the antagonist or another character. The actions of the other character may not be funny alone, but add some commentary and it becomes extremely funny. Overall, dialogue is not the main drive behind all comedic forms, as seen in silent films, but it is still important to modern comedy in its ability to make ordinary things funny. The next important factor of a successful comedy is the pacing.

Fast pacing is the only successful way of making a comedy; the audience must always have something to generate a laugh. Audiences are fickle, and making them wait for something to happen will only cause them to lose interest. The pace must be fast enough to keep people interested, but it must also be at a pace where the audience can keep up with the action. A comedy will not be funny if the next joke starts before the audience even laughs at the last one. A great comedy must find just the right balance that will not lose the audience to boredom, or in a rush.

Give the audience enough time to laugh, but don’t let them stop laughing. Another critical factor in generating a successful comedy is in the use of montage. Cutting shots between different angles helps to keep the audience interested by adding fresh perspective, the film must always be moving, and so must the camera. This is used in addition to close-ups and establishment shots during important sequences. A very effective method of doing this is switching shots between characters during important comedic sequences.

An example of this would be a main character meant to be funny talking to one of the stagnant characters, anti-comic relief, and showing their lack of reaction to something funny done by the main character. Another method is changing the camera angles while a character has difficulty performing a task. A character struggling to carry a box through a door is funny, but gets old unless you constantly montage in order to keep the scene fresh, adding to the pace. Montage is an important factor in successful comedy because a joke needs to stay fresh in order to be funny, as does a comedy.

The casting in a film is of the utmost importance, as not all people are funny in the same situations. Actors all have certain comedic roles, which they best fit into. A serious looking actor with a stern voice would not make a good goofball character. If that same actor is placed into the role of a gangster with the attitude of a child, he becomes a great comic figure. Casting is of the utmost importance as actors must fit their roles, while they have more range in comedy, they still must be believable to some degree.

This can be seen by the great number of comedies where people walk out saying; it would have been funny or funnier with someone else. Casting must be done carefully in order also insure that the characters play well against each other. While a grown man acting like a child is funny at times, it becomes extremely effective when there is another character provoking them to behave that way. In the end, casting determines how the audience will react to the story, and whether jokes will be funny when coming from the selected cast. In the end all of these things tie in to make a comedic film funny.

If the techniques are used properly you will create a high energy comedy that will keep the audience entertained. True classics have everything that a comedy could need, great dialogue, fast pacing, montage, and great casting. When these techniques are used together properly, a comedy cannot fail. The basic goal of a comedy is to stay fresh, and by utilizing these techniques, even the most played out scenario can become funny all over again. Comedy has made us laugh for nearly a century, and it will continue to so long as it is kept new, fresh, and exciting.

What makes a Shakespeare comedy identifiable if the genre is not distinct from the Shakespeare tragedies and histories? This is an ongoing area of debate, but many believe that the comedies share certain characteristics, as described below:  Comedy through language: Shakespeare communicated his comedy through language and his comedy plays are peppered with clever word play, metaphors and insults. Love: The theme of love is prevalent in every Shakespeare comedy.

Often, we are presented with sets of lovers who, through the course of the play, overcome the obstacles in their relationship and unite. Love in Shakespearean comedy is stronger than the inertia of custom, the power of evil, or the fortunes of chance and time. In all of these plays but one (Troilus and Cressida), the obstacles presented to love are triumphantly overcome, as conflicts are resolved and errors forgiven in a general aura of reconciliation and marital bliss at the play’s close.

Such intransigent characters as Shylock, Malvolio, and Don John, who choose not to act out of love, cannot be accommodated in this scheme, and they are carefully isolated from the action before the climax. Complex plots: The plotline of a Shakespeare comedy contains more twists and turns than his tragedies and histories. Although the plots are complex, they do follow similar patterns. For example, the climax of the play always occurs in the third act and the final scene has a celebratory feel when the lovers finally declare their love for each other.

Moreover, the context of marriage—at least alluded to, is the cap-stone of the comedic solution, for these plays not only delight and entertain, they affirm, guaranteeing the future. Marriage, with its promise of offspring, reinvigorates society and transcends the purely personal element in sexual attraction and romantic love. Mistaken identities: The plot is often driven by mistaken identity. Sometimes this is an intentional part of a villain’s plot, as in Much Ado About Nothing when Don John tricks Claudio into believing that his fiance has been unfaithful through mistaken identity.

Characters also play scenes in disguise and it is not uncommon for female characters to disguise themselves as male characters, seen in Portia in the Merchant of venice. Shakespeare’s 17 comedies are the most difficult to classify because they overlap in style with other genres. Critics often describe some plays as tragi-comedies because they mix equal measures of tragedy and comedy. For example, Much Ado About Nothing starts as a Shakespeare comedy, but takes on the characteristics of a tragedy when Hero is disgraced and fakes her own death.

Shakespeare generally observed these conventions, though his inventiveness within them yielded many variations. 4. Eighteen plays are generally included among Shakespeare’s comedies. In approximate order of composition, they are. These works are often divided into distinct subclasses reflecting the playwright’s development. The first seven, all written before about 1598, are loosely classed as the ‘early comedies’, though they vary considerably in both quality and character.

The last four of these—Loves Labour’s Lost, the Dream, the Merchant, and the Merry Wives—are sometimes separated as a transitional group, or linked with the next three in a large ‘middle comedies’ classification. The Merry Wives is somewhat anomalous in any case; it represents a type of comedy—the ‘city play’, a speciality of suchwriters as Ben Jonson and Thomas Dekker—that Shakespeare did not otherwise write. The next three plays. Much Ado, As You Like It, and Twelfth Night, are often thought to constitute Shakespeare’s greatest achievement in comedy; all written around 1599-1600, they are called the romantic, or mature, comedies.

The next group of three plays, called the Problem Plays, which include Alls Well that Ends Well, Troilus and Cressida, and Measure for Measure that were written in the first years of the 17th century, as Shakespeare was simultaneously creating his greatest tragedies. The final cluster, all written between about 1607 and 1613, make up the bulk of the playwright’s final period. They are known as the Romances which include Pericles, Cymbeline, The Winter’s Tale, The Tempest, and often The Two Noble Kinsman. (The problem plays and romances were intended to merge Tragedy and comedy in Tragicomedies.

Many minor variations in this classification scheme are possible; indeed, the boundaries of the whole genre are not fixed, for Timon of Athens is often included among the comedies, and Troilus and Cressida is sometimes considered a tragedy. 5. Shakespeare’s earliest comedies are similar to existing plays, reflecting his inexperience. The Comedy of Errors—thought by many scholars to be his first drama, though the dating of Shakespeare’s early works is extremely difficult—is built on a play by the ancient Roman dramatist Plautus. Characteristically, Shakespeare enriched his source, but with material from another play by Plautus.

The Subplot of The Taming of the Shrew was taken from a popular play of a generation earlier, and the main plot was well known in folklore, though the combination was ingeniously devised. The Two Gentlemen of Verona likewise deals with familiar literary material, treating it in the manner of John Lyly, the most successful comedy writer when Shakespeare began his career. 6. However, the young playwright soon found the confidence to experiment, and in Loves Labour’s Lost, the Dream, and the Merchant, he created a group of unusual works that surely startled Elizabethan playgoers, though pleasurably, we may presume.

In the first he created his own main plot and used a distinctively English variation on the Italian Commedia Dell’Arte traditions for a sub-plot. He thus produced a splendid array of comic situations. The play’s abundant topical humor was certainly appreciated by the original audiences, although today we don’t always know what it is about. In any case, the major characters are charming young lovers, the minor ones are droll eccentrics, and the closing coup de theatre, with which a darkening mood brings the work to a close, is a stunning innovation. Already, the eventual turn towards tragicomedy is foreshadowed.

A Midsummer Night’s Dream mingles motifs from many sources, but the story is again the playwright’s own; moreover, the play’s extraordinary combination of oddity and beauty was entirely unprecedented and has rarely been approximated since. The Merchant of Venice mixes a social theme, usury, into a conventional comedy plot to deepen the resonance of the final outcome as well as to vary the formula. Here, the threat that is finally averted is so dire as to generate an almost tragic mood, again anticipating developments later in the playwright’s career. . The mastery that Shakespeare had achieved by the late 1590s is reflected in the insouciance of the titles he gave his mature comedies (Twelfth Night’s subtitle—’What You Will’—matches the others). That mastery is accompanied by a serious intent that is lacking in the earliest comedies. Shakespeare could not ignore the inherent poignancy in the contrast between life as it is lived and the escape from life represented by comedy. In Much Ado, as in The Merchant of Venice, a serious threat to life and happiness counters the froth of a romantic farce.

Even in As You Like It, one of the most purely entertaining of Shakespeare’s plays, the melancholy Jaques interposes his conviction that life is irredeemably corrupt. Feste’s song at the close of Twelfth Night gives touching expression to such sentiments, as he sends us from the theatre with the melancholy refrain, ‘the rain it raineth every day’ (5. 1. 391). We are not expected to take him too seriously, but we cannot avoid the realization that even the life of a jester may be a sad one.

The mature comedies thus further a blending of comedy and tragedy. 8. In the end, however, all of Shakespeare’s comedies, including the later problem plays and romances, are driven by love. Love in Shakespearean comedy is stronger than the inertia of custom, the power of evil, or the fortunes of chance and time. In all of these plays but one (Troilus and Cressida), the obstacles presented to love are triumphantly overcome, as conflicts are resolved and errors forgiven in a general aura of reconciliation and marital bliss at the play’s close.

Moreover, the context of marriage—at least alluded to at the close of all but Troilus and Cressida—is the cap-stone of the comedic solution, for these plays not only delight and entertain, they affirm, guaranteeing the future. Marriage, with its promise of offspring, reinvigorates society and transcends the purely personal element in sexual attraction and romantic love. Tragedy’s focus on the individual makes death the central fact of life, but comedy, with its insistence on the ongoing process of love and sex and birth, confirms our awareness that life transcends the individual. 10.

Hamlet is one the most discussed dramas in English Literature. It has provoked the critics for four centuries to unravel the mystery behind Hamlet’s delay in taking revenge of his father’s death. His delay has attracted many literary critics to analyze and interpret the reasons for his inaction. The depth of characterization and the complexity of the plot have made the task of the critics more complex and complicated. A systematic analysis of the criticism helps the reader for a better understanding of the character of Hamlet, his inaction and apathy for life.

Hamlet, one of the four great tragedies by William Shakespeare, is the longest and most popular. Hamlet’s delay in avenging his father’s murder, has led many to interpret Hamlet in different ways taking different approaches to demystify the dilemma in Hamlet’s mind. If ‘to be or not to be’ is the question that haunted Hamlet, it is ‘Hamlet’s undue delay’ that has troubled many readers for hundreds of years. Hamlet is an educated gentleman with refined views in an era of turbulent times when his family, state are threatened by forces that are totally beyond his control.

His education has made him into a refined man making him distinctly philosophical. He addresses the questions of universal importance that have troubled many a philosopher. His preoccupation with these questions has only made him more wavering in his attitude and delayed his action. His quest for answers not only deferred his actions but also brought his doom closer to him. At first he is not convinced with the Ghost’s words and wants to have evidence. When he has got evidence, he doesn’t find moral justification for taking revenge. When an opportunity presents itself, he leaves it planning for a more serious punishment.

Thus, the story gets prolonged until it comes to his tragic end. In fact, Hamlet could not reconcile with the idea of cold blooded murder as a justification for revenge. The very introduction of Hamlet is indicative of the nature of his character. He is introduced in the play still ‘wearing black mourning clothes’ (I. ii. 66). He was asked to ‘cast off his nightly color’ by his mother. Obviously he is gloomy and there is something in his mind that escapes a clear statement. It reflects his agonized and troubled mind unable to bear the grief of his father’s death and reconcile with the hasty marriage of her mother with King Claudius.

He was totally devastated by his father’s death and completely betrayed by his mother’s marriage. Finding himself that ‘something is rotten in the ‘, he contemplates suicide. His soliloquy on suicide raising questions of its moral validity sets the tone of the things that come later. (I. ii. 129–130) What we see in Hamlet is a perpetual conflict in his mind that made him literally insane though he pretends that purposefully. ‘To thine ownself be true’ is the guiding principle of his conscience in deciding ‘to be or not to be’ in the beginning, contemplating the merits and demerits of committing suicide.

He feels himself helpless in finding himself in such a ruthless world and thus he laments: O! that this too too solid flesh would melt, Thaw, and resolve itself into a dew; Or that the Everlasting had not fixed His canon ‘gainst self-slaughter! O God! O God! How weary, stale, flat, and unprofitable Seem to me all the uses of this world. (Act. I. Scene. I) Throughout the play we see how his world gets crumbled gradually making him more and more cynical and withdrawn. The most shocking thing for Hamlet is he could not bear the news of his mother marrying his uncle King Claudius in undue haste.

It has totally unsettled his equilibrium. She married: — O, most wicked speed, to post With such dexterity to incestuous sheets! (Act. I. Scene. I) When he is down with depression and shock he is advised by King Hamlet’s Ghost to take revenge. In the darkness, the ghost speaks to Hamlet claiming to be his father’s spirit. It arouses the feelings of vengeance in Hamlet and to revenge his death, a “foul and most unnatural murder” (Act. I. v. 25). Hamlet was horrified at the sight of the Ghost and by knowing how his father was murdered by his uncle Claudius.

At first he could not believe whether the Ghost was real. The message of the Ghost puts him in a dilemma, as it advises him to take revenge on Claudius and not to offend Gertrude and leave her to destiny and her conscience. Hamlet gets shocked and bewildered. He does not like to jump to the conclusion of taking immediate action. He wants to confirm it by his own method of getting enough evidence against King Claudius. To confirm what the King Hamlet’s Ghost has told Hamlet plans to show King Claudius a play which has close resemblance to the murder of King Hamlet.

The play called “The Murder of Gonzago” was played causing King Claudius to react which logically concludes Hamlet’s suspicion. Once his suspicion is confirmed, he wants to proceed with his plans of putting an end to Claudius. Hamlet realizes his weak mind when he feels the intensity in the expression of the dialogues of the players when they were practicing. He resolves to take decisive action and plans a trap for Claudius. Hamlet is quite successful in trapping Claudius and getting evidence from the way Claudius reacts when he watches the drama and cries out at the crucial moment.

It is rather Hamlet’s personal requirement to answer his conscience that he needs clear evidence to prove what King Hamlet’s Ghost has told him. It is the hallmark of Hamlet’s character that he does not jump to conclusion without enough proof. Hamlet’s education and sensitivity and general philosophical disposition must have made him seek for valid proof against the King Claudius. But what surprises everyone is he doesn’t take the chance to kill Claudius when an opportunity presents itself. Hamlet finds his own reasons in not taking the chance.

He doesn’t like to allow his murderous uncle to go to Heaven by killing him when he is in prayer. So he leaves the opportunity which is considered by many the best chance. He reasons out that the murderer of his father does not deserve Heaven. This only delays his action further. According to Dover Wilson there is no delay in avenging the death of Hamlet’s father. He feels Hamlet has acted in time. According to E E Stoll, there is no delay; it is just a convention of the play. He is of the opinion that if there is no delay, there is no play at all. All these indicate that there is delay in taking revenge.

Hamlet himself feels it and it is noteworthy that he has to be reminded by the Ghost again when he was furious with his mother Gertrude. These are proof enough to prove that revenge has been delayed. When the play itself is addressing the issue of delay, it is unreasonable to say that there is no delay. T. S. Eliot, the noted poet and critic considers Hamlet an artistic failure. He says: So far from being Shakespeare’s masterpiece, the play is most certainly an artistic failure. In several ways the play is puzzling, and disquieting as is none of the others.

Of all the plays it is the longest and is possibly the one on which Shakespeare spent most pains; and yet he has left in it superfluous and inconsistent scenes which even hasty revision should have noticed. (Eliot) He also feels that Hamlet is dominated by an emotion which is inexpressible and is in excess. Hamlet is unable to manage his own emotions as he could not find ‘objective correlative’ (Eliot). In other words, it is a set of objects, a situation, a chain of events which shall be the formula of that particular emotion. Explaining his theory, Eliot says:

Hamlet is up against the difficulty that his disgust is occasioned by his mother, but that his mother is not an adequate equivalent for it; his disgust envelops and exceeds her. It is thus a feeling which he cannot understand; he cannot objectify it, and it therefore remains to poison life and obstruct action. (Eliot) In the article Hamlet’s Thoughts and Antics, Margreta de Grazia observes that Shakespeare wanted to create a character that ‘thinks’ and showed it through Hamlet. Shakespeare produced a tragedy of inaction- a tragedy of thought. It is performance of thought-as inaction- as DELAY’. Margreta de Grazia) A. C. Bradley considered an authority on Shakespearean Tragedy, analyses the reasons for Hamlet’s delay in his famous lectures on Hamlet. His discussion on Hamlet attracted many with his convincing reasons. He does not find any external things as obstacles for his delay in taking revenge. Hamlet has access to the King and Hamlet never mentions about any external barriers. Hence citing the external factors as the primary reason for the delay in action is totally nullified. Bradley does not accept Hamlet’s reason to justify his conscience as the main reason for the delay.

Hamlet is unconsciously ambivalent about this duty; Bradley says “in the depths of his nature, and unknown to himself, there was a moral repulsion to the deed. “(Bradley) Goethe’s popular view of Hamlet as a graceful youth, sweet and sensitive, full of delicate sympathies is nothing but ‘sentimental’ according to Bradley. In the same way, Bradley disagrees to Coleridge’s view that Hamlet has ‘lost himself in the labyrinths of thought’. Bradley proposes that Hamlet delays because of his melancholy. Melancholy is not the usual state of Hamlet’s mind. It is a temporary depression at the sudden loss of his father.

And the subsequent incidents will only ‘paralyze him in contempt for everything- the world, the flesh and himself. ’ He justifies it and proceeds further to show how this disgust at life and everything results in longing for death and inexpressible apathy. Hamlet does not understand his own inaction and apathy and curses himself in utter disappointment over his disinclination to take revenge. There is another strong argument claiming that there is no delay in taking revenge. During the presentation of the drama on the stage the spectators never realize Hamlet has delayed his action.

The depiction of the inner struggle of the protagonist rather enhances the effect of the drama on the stage. It provides variety and takes the audience along with the hero to different emotional states and keeps them curious until the end. “This is Shakespeare’s most amusing play” says, Dr. Johnson. The play shows two more characters who want to take revenge of the death of their fathers. They offer a good contrast to Hamlet’s delay. Fortinbras and Laertes are unlike Hamlet. They are effective in their decision to take revenge and are very quick in their action.

Shakespeare presents these two characters offering the spectators an opportunity to understand Hamlet in a different way. When the very purpose of the drama is to present the hero in that mode there is no argument regarding his delay in taking revenge. The argument that Hamlet is basically a coward can not be taken valid at all as there are many instances to show against it. He does not run away from the Ghost as cowards do. He does not escape from the challenges especially the duel between him and Laertes. The claim that Hamlet has a physical problem will only undermine his character.

If there is a serious physical problem, then he becomes a good example for medical case study, and certainly does not deserve a place in literary criticism. The interpretation that he has a serious mental health problem will not stand given the depth and meaning of Hamlet’s soliloquies. In fact, the crucial point in the play is Hamlet himself feels guilty about his inability in taking timely action. He laments at the delay and attributes that to his lack of tenacity for action. He is on the search to know why he is not able to take revenge immediately. He is at a loss to express what represses him from taking revenge.

Freudian school of psychology has interpreted Hamlet’s story from Oedipus complex point of view. Though the argument is persuasive, one can not subscribe to that point. Hamlet continues to be a puzzle and his delay can be interpreted in every possible way. The endless criticism on Hamlet reminds the lines of great Indian poet Rabindranath Tagore, who says “from the words of the poet, men take what meanings please them”. (Tagore) Every interpretation focuses a new aspect of Hamlet. It is worth exploring as it helps readers to have a better understanding of Hamlet’s dilemma.

William Shakespeare wrote another tragedy about a Moor of Venice named, “Othello. ” The story started when Othello appointed Cassio to be his lieutenant. This made Iago very angry. At that time, Othello was seeing a beautiful woman named, Desdemona, the daughter of senator Brabantio. This gave an opportunity for Iago to get back at Othello for not appointing him as lieutenant. Iago then convinced Rodrigo, who has a deep desire for Desdemona, to tell Brabantio about her relationship with Othello.

At first, Brabantio didn’t believe them, but was convinced at last. Enraged, he ordered Othello arrested, but Othello was summoned by the Duke of Venice on “urgent matters. ” Brabantio ended up accusing Othello of using “spells and potions” to win Desdemona in front of the Duke. Othello, of course, denied bewitching his daughter. So Brabantio blessed their marriage. Desdemona loved Othello very much that she offered to go with him when the Duke ordered Othello to defend Cypress from the coming Turkish fleets.

This made Rodrigo very jealous, but still hoped to win her one day, wishing that Othello too, will eventually get tired of her. Iago advised Rodrigo to make money by “selling his lands and fighting in wars,” to be able to impress Desdemona. Fortunately, a tempest wrecked the Turkish fleet, “eliminating the threat” and people rejoiced. While rejoicing, Iago told Rodrigo how Desdemona was “flirting” with Cassio. Iago then advised him to provoke a fight with Cassio to get him in “trouble” with local authorities.

In reality, all Iago wanted to do was to make Othello jealous of Cassio and Rodrigo. To make this happen, Iago made Cassio drunk, and therefore being drunk, he had a fight with Rodrigo. Othello then dismissed Cassio from his post as lieutenant. Iago then advised Cassio to meet secretly with Desdemona, to help him convince Othello to reappoint him as lieutenant. Knowing that Cassio will heed his advice, Iago, one day, brought Othello with him so Othello could witness the “secret meeting. ” This helped spark Othello’s jealousy and suspicion.

Iago had continuously worked on Othello’s jealousy, and he even used his wife, Emilia, to his advantage. He asked Emilia to steal the beloved “handkerchief” Othello gave to Desdemona as a gift. He placed the handkerchief in Cassio’s room, and told Othello that he’d seen Cassio use it. This totally enraged Othello, so he appointed Iago to be the new lieutenant, and told him to kill Cassio, but the Duke already appointed Cassio to be in charge. (Jalic Inc. ). With his rage, he was able to strike Desdemona: Othello: I am glad to see you mad. Desdemona: Why, sweet Othello…

Othello: [Striking her] Devil! Desdemona: I have not deserved this. Lodovico: My lord, this would not be believed in Venice, Though I should swear I saw’t: ’tis very much: Make her amends; she weeps. Othello: O devil, devil! If that the earth could teem with woman’s tears, Each drop she falls would prove a crocodile. Out of my sight! Desdemona: I will not stay to offend you. Lodovico: Truly, an obedient lady: I do beseech your lordship, call her back. (Shakespeare, Act IV, Scene I). Confused and hurt, Desdemona tried to understand her husband.

Iago then led Rodrigo to kill Cassio, but Cassio lived and Rodrigo was killed instead. Othello, on the other hand, killed Desdemona. Brabantio killed himself upon knowing what happened to his daughter. In the end, Bianca and Emilia told the truth, and Iago “killed Emilia” for revealing it. Due to despair, Othello eventually killed himself. Iago was left under “Cassio’s hands” to be punished. (Jalic Inc. ). Othello started as a strong character. He is the “Moor” of Venice, a very handsome Berber-Arab, and Muslim origin.

The evil character, Iago, first tried Othello by making his relationship with Desdemona known to Brabantio, but Othello won since he eventually married her. The Duke of Venice even appointed him to defend Venice from invaders. However, he has one great weakness: his jealousy. He loved his wife so much that jealousy attacked him enough to believe his right-hand man, Cassio, was really involved with his wife. The greatest problem here is the lack of communication between Othello and Desdemona. Othello got mislead by the malicious taunting of Iago.

The sad part is, his character entirely changed that he became so hostile towards his “beloved” wife. His very weak character leads him to be defeated when he killed his own wife. He even became more pathetic when he killed himself. In reality, are we like Othello, easily defeated by rumors? There were a lot of ways to prove somebody’s innocence and Othello didn’t do it. There were a lot of couldas, wouldas, shouldas that Othello might have done, but he let jealousy overcome his being. We can learn a lot of things from this tragedy, as these tragedies are real experiences of the past, too.