Julie Taymor’s Titus Andronicus Essay

Titus Andronicus is a play renowned for its bloodshed and human suffering. Shakespeare’s strategic use of diction, literary devices such as alliteration and rhyme heightens the dark ambiance. The dark and lifeless images which pervade Tamora’s monologue explores the breakdown of human goodness and familial relations and loyalty. Titus Andronicus demonstrates the dangerous force of vengeance. Furthermore, Shakespeare’s underscores the complexity of gender roles that can impede female liberties through enduring patriarchal societal values who elevates a prudent woman over the ‘wildly’ lustful woman susceptible to her sexual appetite.

Allistair Brown claims that we take entertainment out of simulated violence because it is cathartic (Brown). Brown also argues that, “Violence becomes comic because laughter, denying the reality or seriousness of whatever threatens, is a way of dealing with trauma” (Brown). With the world being consumed with death at every doorstep, what is so far-fetched at the notion that Titus Andronicus is an extremely dark comedy to help a broken soul cope with the grim reality of medieval life? As there is almost nothing else for society to take away as a benefit from the play (RedEyesTakeWarning), what else could it be? There are already plenty of examples in literature that deliver morals and lessons learned from seeking revenge. Why

Titus is a film adaption of William Shakespeare’s revenge tragedy, Titus Andronicus. Sponsored by Overseas Filmgroup and Clear Sky Productions, director Julie Taymor and produces Conchita Airoldi and Jody Allen were able to bring Shakespeare’s vision to life. The main characters Titus and Tamora were played by Anthony Hopkins and Jessica Lange. Throughout the film the audience experiences how destructive revenge can be and the effects it has. A few important quotes that applies to this film would be, “If one wishes for revenge, before you know it, a hurt as bad as the one wished for will come upon the wisher” by CLAMP and “Before you embark on a journey of revenge, dig two graves” by Confucius. The movie Titus shows that revenge is an

In the play "Titus Andronicus", the theme of parents and children is clearly visible, and the audience get to see a humanitarian side of the presumably purely evil Aaron, that he shows towards his son. Unlike the hero of the play, Titus, who does not hesitate to "slay his son in a wrongful quarrel"(Shakespeare 1.1.294) and disown him:"Nor thou, nor he, are any sons of mine; my son's would never so dishonour me"(Shakespeare 1.1.295-296), Aaron refuses that his son be killed, and makes it clear that he "shall not die"(Shakespeare 4.2.81) and that he who touches his son "will die upon his scimitar's sharp point"(Shakespeare 4.2.91-92).Some might argue that Aaron's actions towards his son are simply egotistical ,and that he sees

Although Twelfth Night is renowned for its comical nature and cross-dressing, on closer examination it appears that Shakespeare has used this comedy to have a greater effect on the audience than pure humour, supporting Berry’s statement. However, before attesting that Berry is entirely correct, we must evaluate three things: the way in which Shakespeare makes the audience feel ashamed, whether this shame is felt by both contemporary audiences and Elizabethan/Jacobean audiences, and whether shame is, as Berry writes “the ultimate effect”.

All the persons Shakespeare depicts in Titus are two dimensional, either good or bad. The dividing line falls between those who support Titus, the tragic warrior hero, and those on the side of Tamora, the evil Queen-empress. The former are noble and selfless, demonstrating roman pietas, while the latter are ignoble and selfish. In Jack E. Reese's essay, The Formalization of Horror in Titus Andronicus, he makes the point that Tamora and her sons' allegorical dressing-up as "Revenge, Murder, and Rapine can be viewed as a symbol of the characterization of the entire work" (Horror 79). In this scene, they are as they are, the symbol is exactly the same as the person. The only two characters who might be said to escape the dichotomy are Titus and Aaron the Moor. In Rome, Titus "sacrifices" both his son and his daughter, says Miola, "on the alter of his own personal honor" (Family 67). It is fair to say that personal honor is his concern in killing his offspring, for Mutius represents shameful filial disobedience (or mutiny) and Lavinia represents his inability to protect her and is a reminder of a shameful act done not only to her, but to her whole Andronici family too. It

Every villain has their motives, but the best ones never truly reveal them. In Shakespeare’s play, Titus Andronicus, the titled character is an old war hero whose downfall is his dedication to his country over his own family.Titus has come back from a war with the goths, among his prisoners is Aaron the moor. Aaron is a black man in service of the goths, who has a secret affair with their empress, Tamora. Aaron is the play’s ultimate “other “ because of his cruel wit and his race. Aaron’s scheming puppet master like tendencies, his outsider status, and his shameless bloodlust give him the most control over all of the characters fates and the outcome of the play.

In Shakespeare’s widely recognized play, Hamlet, he successfully gathers the audience’s attention by raising issues pertaining to them at the time and other thoughtful ideas, as per example in the soliloquy of Act IV, Scene IV. While the audience is captivated by Shakespeare’s poetic prowess, it is evident that his plays are enchanted with a deeper meaning than that which meets the eye. It

In his play Titus Andronicus, William Shakespeare focuses on the crumbling lives of Titus Andronicus, a noble Roman war general set against the Goths, his children, and the numerous individuals Titus interacts with throughout the play. Beginning with the war between the Goths and the Romans ending, Titus’ introduction into the play surrounds him returning home from battle with the captured Queen Tamora, her three surviving sons Demetrius, Chiron, and Alarbus, her lover Aaron, and his own sons Martius, Mutius, Lucius, and Quintus. Tamora pleads for her eldest son to be spared when Titus chooses Alarbus as a perfect sacrifice, and has her wishes ignored by Titus who declares that Alarbus “…is marked, and die he must, T’ appease their groaning shadows that are gone” (1.1.128-29). The term “shadows” used here could stand for “spectral forms or phantoms”, and Titus, being a superstitious man in this regard, decides that Alarbus must be used in a ritual to appease the ghosts of

The reader can see the early development of some of Shakespeare’s most iconic themes in Titus Andronicus. The play’s pages are rife with brutality, corruption, revenge, and death. A cycle of death that is prompted by a war between the Romans and Goths and how death continues to wreak havoc in Rome after the war is over. Although Tamora and her sons’ vengeance seems to direct the actions of the play, Aaron is the one who orchestrates the calamity of Titus’ family. Aaron proudly identifies as the devil and exclaims that his soul is as black as his skin; he embraces the label set on him by Roman society, yet being an outcast may have turned him into that proud devil (Shakespeare). In Titus Andronicus, the reader meets Aaron at moments where he shows concern and distress for his son’s future, humanizing him in the process and making Aaron a complex antagonist. Although Aaron is a cruel character, the abuse he takes from Roman society molds him into a sympathetic, multi-dimensional character.

In fact, the two characters in Shakespeare’s plays are very significant since their stance against the damaged honor is similar. Titus and Hamlet have their own individual moral standpoints on taking revenge in which one display emotional outbursts that is Titus and another shows maturity of thought while

There is such a considerable amount of violence in Titus, varying in intensity and degree that it might seem hard to draw any firm conclusions about its impact. One can, however, obtain the idea that the violence within the play has a far greater impact on both the audience and the on-stage characters when accompanied by a rhetoric or language that either juxtaposes or reinforces the brutality. The way in which characters react to violence, evident through their speech and imagery, can manipulate our responses to them and instil either an affinity or indifference to their personalities. Titus' first appearance in Act I Scene I is an example of this manipulation. His cold, calculating rejection of Tamora's plea for her son's life, juxtaposed with the solemn, funeral rhetoric give us the impression of a character who can flit between brutality and normality very easily, and who demonstrates little compassion when doing so.

In Titus Andronicus, we learn the absurd story of a father who lost most of his family because of his eagerness to keep his honor. Sadly, his efforts were in vain due to the fact his pride and false sense of loyalty to the royal crown drove him to do the craziest things. In the play “The Tragedy of Titus Andronicus,” William Shakespeare portrays the humanity of every character -the nobles and the villains- and the way they react to every situation in the play. Titus was a father whose innocent family was victim of the situation, but his decision to sacrifice Tamora’s son sparked the rivalry between the two and the doom of Titus himself. This helps me to come to the conclusion that this play is not to be taken seriously. As Harold Bloom stated

The imagery that is shown in the play Titus Andronicus is beautiful but deadly and explicit. The text in the play often describes bloody and explicit stage imagery that would give an overall explicit visual experience to the audience. This explicit visual image was also witnessed by the many readers that studied only the play. While reading the play, I had noticed that the imagery of dismemberment among the characters in the play was widely noticed. This imagery was consistent among the different scenes throughout the play.

Scholars theorize that the first performance of The Tragedy of Julius Caesar took place during the “early summer of 1599”. The reason behind the postulation is due to the lack of official reports written of its stage début. Research into the date has yielded three additional dates permitting scholars to render the estimated year. The first date considered is the play’s lack of mention in Francis Mere’s periodical, published in late 1598, that year’s list of plays. The second date originates from a journal entry of Thomas Platter, a Swiss doctor visiting London in the fall of 1599, who describes the play as “very pleasingly performed”. The third date is from a line delivered in the play Hamlet in 1601 by Polonius referencing the play (Orgel,