Robert's Change

In Book I we hear about Roberts trip to America and it effect on him. I found that our discussion in class about this topic was quite interesting and enlightening.
The connection between Roberts changes and America as a whole's change was an interesting idea that came up during the discussion and I think that this connection could be quite important to Robert character. America had just come out of a war successful in The Sun Also Rises and then proceeded to go into an isolationism period. This is reflected in Roberts change after returning from America. As Jake says he was a "nice boy" before he went he also informs us that he is not since his return from America. Robert was also successful like the U.S. had been in the war, as he had done well in the publishing of his book. After returning to Paris his is rejected by his friends and spends his time alone, while the U.S. also spent a good deal of time apart from Europe and the rest of the world.
I also think that the values of America made Robert feel powerful, and inflated his ego. Because Robert feels inferior to Jake because Jake went to war, I feel that some of the ego that was the product of his success in America is due to the fact he feels as powerful, successful, or as manly as Jake. Unfortunately because everyone dislikes Robert he is still rejected and considered a boy in many circumstances because he has not been to war like many of Jake's friends. "Robert has not been to war, and he acts as if he is an equal among Jake and his friends who have all been to war, and that frustrates Jake," I agree with Kanchans statement here.
I also wonder at the connections between Robert and Jake's situations and personalities. The discussion we had came upon the similarities in their situations and relationship problems but I also wonder at whether there is more to Roberts success in America; and his further failure in relationships and Jake's success in surviving the war; but loosing his ability to have sex. Because of the similar successes and failures I think that this might also have contributed to the hatred Jake has towards Robert because he sees all of his own failures in Robert.

From a long time ago...

                Well. having just watched the first two acts I found that the stage is quite interesting. Because of how the actors walk on and off the stage through the crowd there is a lot more interaction with the crowd than the book could portray. I think that this improves the performance because I feel part of it even though  I am not even in the theater. 
                I also found the transition between court and the forest was also amazing. I think that the way that the trees appeared added to the magical attributes that we experience during the characters stay in the forest, furthering the Pastoral nature of the play.  Because if the magical features of the forest appearing out of the court it also foreshadows the similarities of between the two settings.
                The characters in the play are also quite helpful to understand there position in each situation. In the Globe production Rosalind and Celia both are wearing very restrictive because of the fashion. This introduces the reader and audience of the restrictive nature of the court that is discussed further in the play by many different characters. This is also seen in the change in their attire when they more to the forest and both are wearing clothing that does not confine as much as their court wear. Also the jester is very dressed up while in the court and removes him from the more important people of  the court, while in the forest he is dresses like every one else. This change assists the contributes to the idea in the pastoral that every one is equal.

Antagonist

           An antagonist is a "person who is opposed to, struggles against, or competes with another." (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/antagonist) Jaques as an antagonist is an interesting idea because there are who of them. However, Jaques of the court is a very good candidate for antagonist because he is the opposite of everyone in the plat. Jaques's actions and comments all contradict those of the other characters in the play.
            Jaques's melancholy actions and comments often show the opposite of those around him whoa re all in love or happy with their life at the current time.
                    "Jaques: What statues is she of?
                     Orlando: Just as high as my heart.
                     Jaques: You are full of pretty answers. Have you not been acquainted with goldsmiths' wives, and conned them out of rings?
                     ...
                     Jaques: I'll tarry no longer with you. Farewell, good Signior Love.
                     Orlando: I am glad of your departure. Adieu, good Monsieur Melancholy." (Act 3 Scene 2, Lines 249-253 and 270-273)

His mocking of love shows the ridiculousness of both sides; that the love at first sight attitude is extreme as is the complete rejection of love. In the discussion with the producers Dominic Cooke and Michael Boyd, Dominic Cooke thinks that "Jaques is the cynic who was once the lover. He was once the Orlando figure, and that;s why he despises Orlando so much: because Orlando represents something that he has crushed within himself-- the loving, open-hearted, vulnerable young man who will, in Jaques' eyes, inevitably get hurt."(As You Like It, In performance: The RSC and Beyond) I think that with the limited knowledge of Jaques background this could very well be true after seeing his actions around people in love or those who are joyous.
            Jaques's actions that are not relating to those character in love also portray Jaques's opposite reactions to things compared to the others around him.
                     "First Lord: ...His weeping into the needless stream;
                                      'poor deer,' quoth he,'thous mak'st a testament
                                      As worldlings do, giving thy sum of more
To that which had too much.'"  (Act 2 Scene 1, Lines 21 and 37-44)
  Jaques's reaction to the deer displays him as the opposite to every body  because they all see it as necessary to survive in the forest in which they have been banished while Jaques is sad and depressed about the loss of life in the deer.       

Interpretation and Adaptation

Michael Boyd

One thing that stood out to me a lot is that the performances are very subjective. The adaptation and interpretation does not only appear withthe acting of the play but also what do the producers do with the costuming andsetting. Things that stay the same to show the similarities that the readermust interpret from reading, also the differences that are subtle also play alarge part in the audience’s perception. I found the ways that the separateproducers interpreted really changed the way that I looked at the play even forthe brief moments that I was reading their descriptions. In regard to thedisplay of the two worlds the opposite approach was used by Michael Boyd opposed to Dominic Cooke. I thought that not only was the change inperspectives interesting but also the way Boyd and Cooke demonstrated theirviews of the play in their performances.While Cooke focuses on the harsh reality of theforest and bare human nature, Boyd focuses on the romantic view of nature andpulling your true self into the open. I found, in Becca's blog, and interesting conclusion she came too, "Boyde tends to be on the more simple side of things than Cook "

The placement of the tragic court and the comic Arden discussion was also interesting because of the view that Cooke had. Cooke's opinion was that Shakespeare implementation of the forest and the court had more to them then just tragedy and comedic relief; his view was that the obviousness of the falseness of the court was actually amplified in the forest. I found this interesting because from this perspective the play was not showing the true nature of people but rather just another mask that everybody has on. Cooke uses Rosalind as his support in this perspective, and that I also found interesting. Because of the mask of Ganymede that she wears for Orlando I see where Cooke is coming from, after watching the play performed by the globe where Orlando actually knows that Ganymede is Rosalind this really shows the depth of changes and adaptations that can be made without really changing Shakespeare's original play.

http://rrobbins.hsblogs.aes.ac.in/2011/09/05/adaptation/

Sarcasm

Sarcasm is used throughout Shakespeare's As You Like It. Shakespeare's Touchstone is a perfect vessel to deliver social commentary through sarcasm. Throughout the plays sarcasm is used to comment on society, societies rules, and those who do not have a sense of humor. During the play we encounter many different characters who do not understand that many jokes are being cast their way and are going straight over their head. Because of this the readers of the play understand the necessity of the jester who makes light of everything while he continues to point out the absurdities around them.

In the plays Act III Scene 2 Touchstone's potential is displayed as he describes the life in the courts compared to that of the country. In this scene Touchstone mocks the life in both cases while describing the absurdity of life in the courts and the different manners of both. During this encounter between Touchstone and Corin the sarcasm also enhances that fact that both lives are not better or worse than the other but they have there own draw backs and benefits.

"Those that are good manners at the court are as ridiculous in the country as the behavior of the country is most mockable at the court" (ActIII, Scene II, Line 40-42)

Corin's discovery while defending against Touchstone's claim, we can see that their is much truth in these words and that neither man is better than the other for their different homes, mannerisms, or morals.

Orlando and Oliver

I think an important part of Act 1 is what we see of the relationship between Orlando and Oliver. Right off the bat we can see that Orlando and Oliver do not have the best relationship from Orlando's rant at Adam about the treatment he receives from Orlando. In this rant we can gather that not only does Oliver treat him like an animal, but also refuses to give him an education and the other things that their father left for him, while the third bother gets to enjoy a proper education. The relationship is further show to have problems when Orlando overpowers Oliver holding onto his arm and throat. Because of the physical power that Orlando has over Oliver it is apparent that Oliver see Orlando as a threat, this does nothing to help their relationship. Oliver proceeds to the lie to Charles about warning Orlando about the upcoming wrestling match, and does not seem phased and even encourages Charles to kill Orlando. This relationship is important to Act 1 because of the power invested in this relationship, through the jealousy and fear that Oliver has for Orlando and the sheer physical power that Orlando has over Oliver.I feel that this relationship is mirrored in the relationship between the two dukes. because of the similarities of the relationships I fell that these relationship will play a major role throughout the duration of the play. This relationship is also important to the story because of the new relationship that the brother have in the end as well as the growing relationships between them and the other characters in the play. Also I feel that the relationship between the brother is interesting when compared with the relationship of the girls, Rosalind and Celia. I think that this comparison is important because of the complete opposite relationships that they have, hate (between Orlando and Oliver) and love (between Rosalind and Celia). I also find this interesting because of the relationship that they have family wise because Orlando and Oliver are closer in the terms of a family tree but are separate emotionally, while Celia and Rosalind and only cousins but are really tight emotionally.

Characters from Act 1

Misunderstandings

Ian Johnston’s “Dramatic Structure: Comedy and Tragedy,” describes the differences and similarities between Comedies and Tragedies. As Johnston begins he immediately mentions disorder, and how disorder plays a major role in both dramas. Throughout Abbott and Costello’s performances there are misunderstandings and confusion, this is predominantly the humor that is found along with a little slap stick. The clip above displays both the misunderstanding and confusion that is described in the lecture by Johnston and the slapstick that the confusion proceeds’ to cause. The humor is also found in the ridiculous changes the singer (Costello) blindly makes until he finally falls off the stage. As Johnston’s lecture goes on, he informs us that comedies end with everyone becoming aware of what actually happened and rejoicing, in the case of many Abbott and Costello performances Costello never really becomes aware of his actions and therefore continues the comedy.