William Shakespeare

A. P. Literature How does Shakespeare express theme through language? Shakespeare, an extraordinary writer, uses many literary techniques which prove his mastery of English. His most fascinating technique however, is displaying theme through language. In his play “Hamlet”, Shakespeare uses language to address existential dilemma, truth, and death. These themes significantly shape “Hamlet” into the masterpiece it is. In his play, Shakespeare expresses existential dilemma through Hamlet. Hamlet’s life so far has gone roughly in a negative direction.

His father, the King of Hamlet, has passed away; and disappointingly, Hamlet comes back to a crowd that is busy acknowledging the new king, Claudius, and is forgetting about the death of his father. Shakespeare uses language to express theme through Hamlet’s soliloquy, “To be, or not to be”. In his soliloquy, Hamlet asks himself whether he should kill himself, or keep going. Hamlet illustrates the strain that many people feel at one point or another, the world is just too much. Another theme that Shakespeare expresses in his play through language is truth. For a “madman” such as Hamlet, he is pretty intent on getting his facts straight.

Hamlet wants to be sure Claudius is his father’s murderer before he takes any drastic action. After being enraged by his father’s speech, Hamlet tries to find out the truth. In Act 3, Scene 2, Hamlet stages a play called “Mousetrap”, which portrays the death scene his father described. During that scene, Hamlet intends to watch Claudius to see if he expresses guilt. Through language, Shakespeare shows truth. Hamlet goes to great measures of finding out what is true; expressing a view that believing if another is honest is a matter of great trust, or great naivete. Lastly, Shakespeare expresses through language the theme of death.

In Shakespeare’s play, Hamlet encounters death through his father’s ghost, and in Polonius’s and Ophelia’s demises. These run ins prompt Hamlet to look at death through different angles. For instance, the ghost of his father causes Hamlet to think about the spiritual aftermath of death. After Polonius’s death in Act 4, Hamlet compares death to the “Worm that ate the king’s corpse, that might be used to catch a fish to feed a beggar”. In other words, Shakespeare comments that death is a great equalizer, or as a stepping stone to truth away from an ambiguous dishonest world.

Hamlet is a play that strongly represents the themes of the world through the language of art. Shakespeare enforces his views of the world through events that can be decoded into many messages. With just a few characters and occurrences, Shakespeare is able to illustrate themes such as existential dilemma, truth, and death. Through its many ingenious themes, “Hamlet” can be considered an outline of the treacherous world we live in. If you take anything for granted, or trust everything you hear, your path will become a difficult one.

All or most of Shakespeare’s plays contain playfulness and foolishness and within ‘Twelfth Night’ there are many examples of this. All these examples of folly add to the overall humour of the play. Throughout ‘Twelfth Night’ the theme of foolishness links the plot, characters and scenes in the play. In Shakespeare’s day, people wanted to go to the theatre and be able to laugh. They loved all plays with an element of comedy, even Shakepeare’s tragedies have elements of comedy in them. In Romeo and Juliet there are characters seen as crazy or foolish such as Mercutio.

First of all there’s Malvolio, one of the main characters. Proud and pompous, he is easily ridiculed as he is lead into dreadful humiliation at the hands of Fabian, Maria, Sir Toby, Feste and Sir Andrew. All the formentioned people make Malvolio look foolish when Maria writes a letter to Malvolio expressing her love for him and signing it from Olivia. Malvolio falls into the trap and begins to believe that Olivia is madly in love with him. The letter says: ‘Remember who commanded thy yellow stockings and wished to see thee ever cross gartered.’ This causes Malvolio to dress in yellow stockings and cross garters to impress and try to woo his lady. On stage this is a very amusing scene to watch as Malvolio comes on wearing this ridiculous outfit — very memorable.

The letter also says: ‘If thou entertain’st my love, let it appear in thy smiling thy smiles become thee well. Therefore in my presence still smile, dear my sweet I prithee.’ This causes Malvolio to keep a smile on his face constantly. Not only has Malvolio a rather unattractive smile but since Olivia’s brother had recently died, Olivia wants everyone to act mournful around her. She insists on wearing black with a veil over her face. When Malvolio appears with yellow clothing and a huge smile on his face he inevitably looks foolish. Olivia supposes that Malvolio is mad, subject to the heat affecting the brain – ‘Midsummer Madness.’ Malvolio would not have looked so foolish if he had not had certain qualities. His over sensitive nature, pretentiousness, self-centred character and self importance make it simple for the servants and the others involved in the trick to take advantage of these faults and cut Malvolio down to size.

The difference in class between Olivia and Malvolio also adds to the humour and the foolery because in Shakepeare’s day there would be no possibility of any sort of romance between Malvolio and Olivia, Malvolio being a mere steward and Olivia being a wealthy countess, the status contrast is simply too immense. When Malvolio reads the letter, Malvolio begins to fall in love with the idea of being in love .

Another character within Twelfth Night who adds to the theme of foolishness is obviously the fool – a professional jester. Feste has a very important role. He is constantly acting foolishly as his job is to solace and entertain his fellowmates. Although he acts like a clown through most of the play, he is probably one of the most sensible and wise characters in the play. In Act 3, Viola says: ‘This fellow is wise enough to play the fool and to do that well, craves a kind of wit.’ This is an accurate depiction on Feste. He often outsmarts the other characters in the play using his quickwits most of all Malvolio and Olivia. Many other characters are the ‘real fools’ such as Sir Toby Belch — an ironic surname due to his tendency to drink heavily, Sebastian for marrying Olivia when he barely knew her.

Overall, Viola is quite sensible. Although dressed like a man, in those days there would be no way that she would be able to obtain service with Orsino as a woman, so her disguise was quite an ingenious idea. When talking to higher status characters, especially Olivia, Feste almost reverses the roles talking down to Olivia as shown in a conversation on page 17. Other characters cannot talk to Olivia in the same way as Feste, as everyone must look up to her and respect her. Olivia tells Malvolio to ‘Take the fool away’ and Feste answers ‘Do you not hear fellows? Take away the lady.’ Feste also often mocks Olivia as he is the only character who can do so. The first example of this is Feste telling Olivia she is being foolish, her brother has died and she is in mourning this is the first mention of foolishness in the play:

Feste: Good Madonna, why mourn’st thou?

Olivia: Good Fool, for my brother’s death

Feste: I think his soul is in hell, Madonna.

Olivia: I know his soul is in heaven, fool

Feste: The more fool, Madonna, to mourn for your brother’s soul, being in heaven.

There are many other times during the play when aspects of folly come into the characters’ speeches. Feste in Act 1 says: ‘Better a witty fool than a foolish wit.’

There are many other examples of role swapping and disguises that also add to the humour of the play. It also makes characters look foolish and humiliates them. The prime example of role swapping is Viola dressing as a man and changing her identity to become a man called Caesario. This causes much confusion leading to characters being foiled and being made to look foolish. Not only did everyone believe that Viola was in fact a man but Olivia actually falls in love with her and not surprisingly feels humiliated and foolish when she discovers that Caesario is actually a woman. Olivia does look foolish although no-one can mock her due to her high status and most people look up to her with respect.

The language used in the play is not strictly foolish although many of the names are ‘fooled with’ as Viola, Olivia and Malvolio, the main characters, all have names containing the same letters (v,o,l,a and i). Malvolio means ‘ill wishing’ very fitting to his character. There are other character’s names which are amusing such as Sir Toby Belch – ironic as he is a heavy drinker. Aguecheek is a ridiculous name…. And Orsino is named so because Don Virgino Orsino – an Italian Nobleman was the guest of honour at the opening night of Twelfth Night so Shakespeare named the Duke in his play after him.

Twelfth Night was once a day of great merrymaking to mark the end of the Christmas festivities. It was the feast of fools and even now, the Christmas season is a time where we all seek entertainment in the form of amusement and folly. Although written all those years ago, Twelfth Night is still relevant today. A twentieth century audience still enjoy this play today as people still love to laugh and have a good time some of the jokes, although obscure are still found amusing today. Even now we love to see people make fools of themselves and the characters we don’t like to be served with just retribution.

* Characters; I have a recommended choice from either,

1. Olivia, The countess of the countess’s household.

2. Viola, A visitor of the Island Illyria, which will later be called Cesario.

3. Malvolio, The countess’s steward.

I am going to choose Viola. Because I believe that there is more information to write up on this character because of two sides to write about one person. (So, therefore, more to write about and less research!)

How would you present your character in a film/theatre production?

I would present my Twelfth Night play as a film, due to sound, lighting, and computer effects, and also because you can change the scenery in a matter of seconds in a film whereas you can only use 1 set in a theatre.

Example; In act1 scene2 where the play mentions that the “Captain” and “Viola” are on the sea coast of Illyria with pieces of shipwreck all over the beach. After having a good old chat about where they are, it cuts short to act1 scene3 in Orsino’s palace. In a theatre that would be hard to do (maybe impossible!) But in a film, it would be easy. The only reason that I would go for a theatre approach is if I wanted it to be traditional. (Which I don’t!)

I would also base the costumes in Elizabethan times because then the dialect would go with the clothing. My play would be based on a Mediterranean Island that all the people that live on the island talk a hint of Italian, but not the clown (feste) and visitors.

Viola is on a ship with her brother (Sebastian) and crew on their way to an unknown destination, until, a large storm hits the vessel causing all members on board to abandon ship. Most of the crew survive but are unknown in the play; the Captain and Viola escape on the same life raft and get washed up on the shores of Illyria. This island is where the whole of the play takes place and where the countess and duke both live.

The play begins;

The play starts off at Orsino’s palace (act1 scene1), with Orsino saying “if music be the food of love play on” (words follow) and goes to act 1 scene 2, which shows viola and the captain in a lifeboat all tired and disorientated,

Viola “what country is this dear sir?”

Captain “this place be Illyria, me lady”

Viola “and what should I do in Illyria? My brother, he is in Elysium. Perchance he is not drowned; what think you sir?

Captain “It is perchance that you were saved, me lady”

Viola “O my poor brother, he did not live to see the light of day… And so perchance he maybe.” And so on so forth, they keep talking about how she has to become male to be a servant of the duke, so, the captain and her promise to not tell anyone that she’s not a man. But the bit that I find funny is that she pretends to be a male by saying that she was castrated as a young lad and that her/his voice hadn’t broken. (That was hard to explain!)

Act 2 scene 1

Act 2 scene 1 tells you that Sebastian (viola’s brother) is alive and well! But not only that but he’s on the coast of Illyria as well.

Act 2 scene 3

Act 2 scene 3 introduces you to feste the fool! (Clown) I find feste the most interesting character because not only is he more clever than most people on the island

Example; Act1 scene5 line 53

Olivia “well, sir, for want to another idol ness, I’ll bide your proof”

Feste “Good Madonna, why morn’st thou?”

Olivia “good fool, for my brother’s death”

Feste “I think his soul is in hell, Madonna”

Olivia “I know his soul is in heaven, fool”

Feste “the more fool you Madonna, to mourn your brother’s soul being in heaven. Take away the fool gentlemen.”

but he uses technical words to humiliate other people. Feste belongs to the duke to humiliate people and to please him e.g. jokes, dance, and sing songs.

Example;

O mistress mine, where are you coming?

O stays and hears, for your true loves coming,

That can sing for both high and low.

Trip no further, pretty sweeting;

Journeys end in lovers meeting

Every wise man son doth know.

Upon the opening of Act III, Scene II of William Shakespeare’s drama, Romeo and Juliet, Juliet reveals her impatience while waiting for night to come shortly after her marriage with Romeo. At first, Juliet urges the sun to “gallop apace … towards Phoebus’ lodging” in order to swiftly bring about night time so that she may begin her romance with Romeo. Juliet is unwilling to wait for night time and urges the gods to summon the night, pleading to Greek gods even though she is an Italian Catholic. Furthermore, the word ‘gallop’ suggests quick movement. Juliet further demonstrates her urgency when she commands the sky to “bring in cloudy night immediately”, showing both her impatience and her sense of secrecy. Furthermore, her repetitions of the word ‘come’ when she says “come, night; come, Romeo; come”  indicates her agitation while urging the two to arrive with haste. Moreover, Juliet compares herself to “an impatient child that hath new robes/ and may not wear them”, revealing her childish eagerness for the night to come. Juliet’s soliloquy has an impatient tone, illustrated through her imagery and syntax.

Upon the opening of Act III, Scene II of William Shakespeare’s drama, Romeo and Juliet, Juliet reveals her impatience while waiting for night to come shortly after her marriage with Romeo. At first, Juliet urges the sun to “gallop apace … towards Phoebus’ lodging” in order to swiftly bring about night time so that she may begin her romance with Romeo. Juliet is unwilling to wait for night time and urges the gods to summon the night, pleading to Greek gods even though she is an Italian Catholic. Furthermore, the word ‘gallop’ suggests quick movement. Juliet further demonstrates her urgency when she commands the sky to “bring in cloudy night immediately”, showing both her impatience and her sense of secrecy. Furthermore, her repetitions of the word ‘come’ when she says “come, night; come, Romeo; come” indicates her agitation while urging the two to arrive with haste. Moreover, Juliet compares herself to “an impatient child that hath new robes/ and may not wear them”, revealing her childish eagerness for the night to come. Juliet’s soliloquy has an impatient tone, illustrated through her imagery and syntax.

Plays have been written ever since Aristotle discussed the origin and function of theater in his famous treatise Poetics in 330 BC. Shakespeare, William the supreme English poet and playwright, recognized in much of the world as the greatest of all dramatists. He was also the first person to have a script for his plays, macbeth is thought to be the first, written in 1606 and published in 1623. As the play unfolds, Macbeth’s ambition causes him to change his nature towards evil.At the beginning of the play, Macbeth was portrayed as a courageous soldier who fought for his King without mercy. But once the witches planted the seeds of greater things and Lady Macbeth fuelled his ambition, which lead him to become greedy and power hungry.

What is ambition? Ambition is described as eager for success, power or fame. For Macbeth. Ambition was what drove him to become great, it forced him to change his nature towards evil. At the beginning of the play, Macbeth was portrayed as a courageous soldier who fought for his King without mercy. But once the witches planted the seeds of greater things and Lady Macbeth fuelled his ambition, which lead him to become greedy and power hungry.

Macbeth was led down to an unescapable road of doom by an outside force, namely fate in the form of the three witches. There was no supernatural force working against Macbeth, which therefore makes him responsible for his own actions and inevitable downfall. Macbeth is indeed responsible for his own actions, which are provoked by an unwillingness to listen to his own conscience, the witches, and his ambition. The witches tempted Macbeth with their prophecies, which made Macbeth¡¦s heart and mind slowly filled with ambition and his huger for power. The witches predicted, at the beginning of the play, that Macbeth would soon become the Thane of Cawdor and eventually the outright King. They tell Macbeth this, simply to ignite what would finally end up being a burning desire for success.

Lady Macbeth then help Macbeth by inserting ill thoughts into his mind, and provided suggestions as to how to become King. At first, Macbeth rejects the horror in his mind but eventually he succumbs to evil for his ambition is far too great. The effect of the witches on the action of the play can be summarised by these words: ¡§while the influences of the Witches’ prophecies on Macbeth was very great, but it was quite clearly shown that it was only an influence and nothing more¡¨ (from a book called Macbeth Analyse). What I want to say was that Macbeth was just morally weaker than other normal human beings such as Banquo, who have very little ambition, Macbeth should been more responsible for his own actions and not blaming his downfall on the witches and his wife.

Thanks to Lady Macbeth who acts as a ruthless, overpowering woman who dominates her husband and his actions. She makes Macbeth’s decisions for him without giving him any say in his own actions, and she orders her husband to do what she determines to be best for him. It was Lady Macbeth who contrives the plan to kill King Duncan, because she knows that Macbeth would never commit such an act on his own without her prodding. At this present stage, Macbeth still has a conscience and he was very hesitant about killing the King but his weak nature over powers his conscience. Throughout the entire play Macbeth had by many imagination due to his guilt. Like seen the vision of the dagger, the ghost of Banquo, his vivid imagination and his constant worries also provokes him, this showed that he still has a conscience. This was also evident in his terrible dreams, which gives the solid theme that he has indeed “Murdered sleep”.

Macbeth’s personnel ambition and his insatiable lust for power drives him to his downfall. Although Macbeth’s ambition was not in itself evil. Macbeth¡¦s new knowledge, which he obtained from the witches, makes him uncomfortable, as he realises the implications. His first thoughts considering murdering Duncan appeared, and he was scared. But his ambition, his desire for power over comes his fear, for him to pursue the murder.

After he commits the murder, Macbeth Say, ¡§The voice cried ¡¥sleep no more¡¦ to all the house ¡¥Glamis¡¦ hath murdered sleep, and therefore Cawdor shall sleep no more; Macbeth shall sleep no more.¡¨ Knowing that has committed such a vile act makes him uncomfortable. It will be difficult to act innocent and to deal with his guilt.

However when he reaches the kingship, his ambition grow like never before, with his new found power, Macbeth begins to gain strength which he never before possessed. He starts to take charge of his own actions, and Lady Macbeth loses control of him. He no longer needs her to make his decisions for him. This becomes evident, as he planned the murder of Banquo and hired the murderers himself without consulting his wife at all. In fact, Lady Macbeth urges him to forget what has happened in the past and move on.

Macbeth, however, with his new sense of control, refuses to submit to her command. He goes on with his plans to kill Banquo because he was the only one that know about witch¡¦s prophecies other than himself and his wife, he was also scared that his later generations will become king at the same way that he become king (murdering Duncan). He later decides to kill Macduff’s family as well, because he had decide from now oh he¡¦ll act whatever his heart told him to. Lady Macbeth was no longer involved in the decisions of Macbeth’s life, decisions over which she formerly exercised total control. She was left behind with no part in his life, as Macbeth heads off with new plans of his own.

Towards the end of the play when Lady Macbeth went insane and kills herself but still unable to remove the “damned spot” When she died, Macbeth shows some good which may have been. He wishes for a normal life for which he would have lived to an honourable age but he realised that can¡¦t be done. Even when Macbeth hears that the prophecy has become true of Birnam Wood coming to Dunsinane, he rejects this idea and fights on until he realised that Macduff wasn¡¦t born in a natural birth but instead was “Untimely ripped” from his mother¡¦s womb. When Macbeth hears of this he realises what he has done and how the witches tricked him, he was absorbed in his own ambition and can not pull out of it. He realise it was too late so he fights on only to be slain by Macduff.

Macbeth was a virtuous man, corrupted by power and greed. His ambitions led him to treason, murder and brutal killings by ordering the deaths of individuals, including his friends. The witches, to some extent are responsible for these temptations, as they had the power to provide temptation and to induce wrongful doings. His ambition grew within his head until his thirst for power caused him to lose it all to the blade of Macduff¡¦s sword

It is my opinion; Macbeth is by no means but a butcher. Unfortunately his great ambition destroyed him and his relationship between his wife, friends (Banquo) and King Duncan. He was simply tempted by the witches to commit these acts with the only motive being personal glory and achievements. Usually, when not being manipulated, Macbeth was a good, loyal and courageous man, who was held by others of the community, in high esteem.

It is important to note that Locke’s “Second Treatise on Government” is fully rooted on something ideological and taking parts of it can be considered inappropriate, specially, because the circumstances Locke laid on his work varies form that of Richard II.  Knowing this, Richard II can only be analyzed with reference to some concepts found on Locke’s philosophy rather than an actual application or portrayal of such.

Following the flow of Locke’s work, I will start with his concept of the “state of war.”  Locke indicated that a state of war is in contrast with the natural tendency of men to preserve life.  On the other hand, there are certain factors that may threaten a person and may lead him to war or destruction, but never license him to do so.  He supposes that proper implementation of the law and punishment can prevent war.

During the onset of the play, it is clear that Richard II has made an erroneous error in not being able to settle and rule a fair judgement on the dispute between Bolingbroke and Mowbray.  When there is a clear indication that law has been broken and that punishment has no basis or bearing and thus, altered, questions will arise and later bring forth war.

More of this can be discussed when I go into the detail of political and civil society and the dissolution of the government later in this paper.  My point here is that Richard II’s mercy of reducing Bolingbroke’s sentence to 6 years, no matter how justified, is an act outside of the law that he, himself, should inculcate and practice.  Not to add that the trial by combat that was set for Bolingbroke and Mowbray did not take place upon the king’s discretion.

I understand that at the time this play was written, the King is someone ordained by Heaven to rule and so, has the right to grant mercy, create laws, wage war, etc… I believe, on the other hand, perhaps, in one way, or another, similar to Locke, that power is a gift that should never be abused and should always be used for the benefit of the “natural man.”  A state of nature has existed and can never be repelled from.  In a lawful stage, at this time, that seems very unlikely, and so it does, in Richard II, and so, the next turn of events.

The next is Locke’s concept on property.  He pre-supposes that man’s right on land came from the fact that he needs it to survive and he will work to own and maintain it for himself.  Knowing that there was a lot of land for everyone, he assumes that each can be afforded an equal share and that people are not supposed to take more than needed.  He discussed that the value attributed to land, i.e. gold, silver or diamonds is nothing compared to the main purpose – survival.

The application of this concept is obvious in consideration of the fact that during the time the play was written; colonization and acquisition of land, in the name of the King was like a trend.  My point in mentioning this though is that improper allocation of funds, seizure of property as well as the war to Ireland are all part of the picture that led Richard II to his tragic ending.

While the priorities of the king is largely different from that of the common man, the main truth in surrendering one’s fate to the king is for reasons of survival.  Locke has discussed that a man’s title for property is his own labor.  The king however, thinks otherwise.  I think that a king believes that everything under his “kingdom” is considered his possession.

In the ideal sense, this is true because knowing that the king holds the title to everything means the king has to protect, nurture and make sure that his “kingdom” is living the good life.  In Richard II’s case, it seems different.  Well, maybe, for that entire period, expanding the land and winning over governance is the main aim of the king.  The bottom line is that while the king is busy making sure he owns and rules a larger “kingdom,” the people are busy criticizing what the king should do.

Moving on, Locke’s discussion on the political and civil society and the dissolution of government is the main theme of Richard II as well as of this assignment.  Locke primarily said that a government exists when people decides to resign their individual rights to the government.  He however, explicitly points out that there is no place for absolute monarchy in a civil society.  This is because having the rights of all depend on one or few people means that judgement is overseen.

Knowing that the ruler is also the maker and implementer of laws mean that the ruler is not subjected to any judge – the ruler cannot judge himself, perhaps only by conscience, but seemingly, the ruler becomes above of everything he has set.  And so, such may lead to anarchy, rebellion and the disintegration of the government.

The type of government alone is already a subject of discussion for if Locke doesn’t believe in monarchy, then the governance of Richard II is already considered a true government.  Perhaps that was the reason why anarchy, as Locke has discussed, took place later on.

Earlier in this paper, I’ve mentioned that the king’s priorities are different from the common man.  It is important to note that even Locke agrees that the common man will not understand this.  The common man’s concern is simply his/her survival – it doesn’t matter how, where, when, as long as they have the right to land and live well, then all should be well.

I think this is where Richard II failed as a king.  He understands the need for war (land), the ways (funds) and even the need for strong governance (resolving conflict and “politics”) but he did not see things in a bigger picture, he did not use Locke’s simple interpretation of things.  He didn’t listen to the needs of the people and focused only on his needs as king.

The way the play has progressed revealed how all of Locke’s descriptions and/or principles come into perfect merge with the eventual ending.  As I have discussed with his principles on the state of war and of property, it is clear that Richard II has brought his fate upon himself when he acted upon his assumptions.  If he hasn’t ordered the death of the Duke of Gloucester, Henry wouldn’t have had the opportunity to accuse Mowbray with treason (diversion of funds and the Duke’s death).

If he has chosen to let the law decide on the fate of both, he wouldn’t have faced the dilemma of banishment.  Perhaps it was guilt, for Henry’s accusation was true, perhaps, it was because he failed to foresee the course of evens and thought that banishing Henry will be a good-of-a-solution to keep his popularity with the commoners from increasing, or perhaps, it was simply because he was just a weak king.

Locke also discussed that the dissolution of the government as a result of rebellion does not necessarily mean that the government will cease to exist.  It means that change is needed and a new governance is required.  Perhaps, this is why Richard II chose to step down without the need for violence and allowed Henry to rule.  Come to think of it, if he didn’t step down, he wouldn’t have had enough power and manpower to protect him anyway, for even his own army was easily swayed with rumor that he was dead.

It is on that change of governance that Locke finished his discussion.  The play however progressed further into the tragedy it is known for – the murder of Richard II.  I think this part can be associated to Locke’s early discussion on man’s state of nature.  It is quite funny that in spite of the fact that a political and civil society (at least if we are to forego the fact that it’s a monarchy) already exists in Richard II, man’s state of nature – where he believes that he has power over someone weak and/or has the right to subject someone who has offended him – will always be part of it.

And so, Sir Pierce killed Richard II, thinking it is what Henry desires, which is actually true, but in any case, has caused his banishment.  This simply proves that man – no matter what state he or she is, will always be man, just as Locke attempted to base when he discussed his theory.

If you’ll come to think of it, this last scenario is not so much different with the onset of the play where Mowbray was accused of murder and was banished.  The irony of such similarity may simply mean that unless the government is changed, the process will repeat.

Compare and Contrast Sonnet 18 and Sonnet 130 by William Shakespeare In this essay I am going to highlight the comparisons and contrasts between William Shakespeare’s Sonnet 18 and Sonnet 130 and also give my opinions. A similarity between the two poems is that they are both about a man’s love for a woman. Shall I compare thee to a summer’s day? Thou art more lovely and more temperate: Meaning that the woman that Shakespeare loves in Sonnet 18 is ‘more lovely’ than a ‘summer’s day’ and she is just right for him, as summer can sometimes be too hot. In Sonnet 130, it’s also about Shakespeare’s love for a woman.

And yet, by heaven, I think my love as rare As any she belied with false compare. This shows that Shakespeare still loves the woman that the poem is about. Even though in the rest of the poem Shakespeare highlights all of her bad points. My Mistress’ eyes are nothing like the sun; Coral is far more red than her lips red; This means that the woman’ s eyes in this poem are nowhere near as bright as the sun and her lips aren’t as red as coral, but even though she has her bad points, Shakespeare still loves her. This shows that Sonnet 18 and Sonnet 130 are similar in the way they are both about Shakespeare’s love for a woman.

Another comparison between Shakespeare’s Sonnet 18 and Sonnet 130 is that in both the poems Shakespeare uses metaphors to describe the two women in the poems. Shall I compare thee to a summer’s day? Thou art more lovely and more temperate: Here, Shakespeare compares the woman to a summers day and says that she is ‘more lovely and more temperate’ meaning that the woman is not too hot or not too cold. Shakespeare also uses metaphors in Sonnet 130. If snow be white, why then her breasts are dun; This compares the woman’s skin in Sonnet 130 to the colour of snow.

This shows that a comparison between Sonnet 18 and Sonnet 130 is that they both do use metaphors. Another comparison of Shakespeare’s Sonnet 18 and Sonnet 130 is, in the sonnets, the women aren’t named. Shall I compare thee to a summer’s day? In Shakespeare’s Sonnet 18, Shakespeare calls the woman he talks about ‘thee’ and in Sonnet 130 the woman is also anonymous. My mistress’ eyes are nothing like the sun; In Sonnet 130 Shakespeare calls the woman ‘his mistress’. This shows that another comparison between the two poems is that the women in both of them are anonymous.

One of the differences between Shakespeare’s Sonnet 18 and Sonnet 130 is that in Sonnet 18, Shakespeare highlights the woman’s beauty, but in Sonnet 130, Shakespeare highlights the woman’s faults. But thy eternal summer shall not fade, Nor lose possession of that fair thou ow’st, Here, in Sonnet 18, Shakespeare is saying that the woman’s beauty never fades whereas summer fades after a while. In Sonnet 130 Shakespeare highlights the woman’s bad points. Coral is far more red than her lips’ red; Here Shakespeare is saying that the woman’s lips aren’t red like coral, which to Shakespeare is a bad thing, which he highlights.

This proves that a difference between Shakespeare’s Sonnet 18 and Sonnet 130 is that in Sonnet 18 he highlights the woman’s good features, whereas in Sonnet 130 Shakespeare highlights the woman’s bad features. Another difference between the two sonnets is that in Sonnet 18 Shakespeare pays the woman lots of complements, whereas in Sonnet 130 Shakespeare insults the woman. So long as men can breathe, or eyes can see, So long lives this, and this gives life to thee. This is a complement from Sonnet 18, which means, as long as people can see and as long as she is alive she will be beautiful and full of life.

In Sonnet 130 though, Shakespeare insults the woman. And in some perfumes is there more delight Than in the breath that from my mistress reeks. This insult from Sonnet 130 is saying that perfumes smell a lot better than his wife’s breath. This shows that a difference between Shakespeare’s Sonnet 18 and Sonnet 130 is that in Sonnet 18 Shakespeare complements the woman, whereas in Sonnet 130, Shakespeare insults the woman. My view is that these two sonnets are both love poems. I think in Sonnet 130 Shakespeare insults and highlights the woman’s bad points, but he still loves the woman he talks about.

And yet, by heaven, I think my love as rare As any she belied with false compare. This means that in Shakespeare’s Sonnet 130, even though all of the woman’s bad points he still loves her. In Shakespeare’s Sonnet 18 Shakespeare highlights the woman’s good points and says how beautiful she is. Shall I compare thee to a summer’s day? Thou art more lovely and more temperate: This shows one of the complements that Shakespeare pays the woman in Sonnet 18. This shows that both the sonnets are love poems. In this essay I have highlighted similarities and differences between Shakespeare’s Sonnet 18 and Sonnet 130 and gave my opinion of them.