The Bloody Root Of Titus Andronicus

If Shakespeare had not chosen to alter the not so palatable history he found in the Chronicles by adding sensational art and more dramatic effect, the play would not have conveyed the message in the very effective way it does now and with that emotional appeal, since “catching the conscience of Macbeth, and through him, of the audience was surely a major source of the play’s power and a source that helps immensely to explain why there is so much sensational art in the play.”

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.

Throughout the last century, a raging phenomenon known as the “Authorship Debate”, has come to light. It disputes whether Shakespeare himself wrote the plays and sonnets or if it was someone else writing under a pseudonym. There are countless theories of who the writer might actually be but the main suspects are Shakespeare himself, Edward de Vere, Sir Francis Bacon, Christopher Marlowe, William Stanley, Roger Manners, Sir Walter Raleigh and Mary Sidney Herbert (Pressley).

Dr. Alistair Brown’s article discusses humanity’s amazing ability to make violence entertaining. Dr. Brown suspect’s laughter is a defense mechanism activated when a moment is too horrific. He also believes how and why the death of a character occurs will determine the audiences emotional response. What’s most uncomfortable about Titus Andronicus is the really terrifying, brutal, and monstrous deeds done happen in real life. Dr. Brown addresses Lavinia’s rape, Chiron and Demetrius’ violent acts, Aaron’s sly self-loyalty, racism, and clashing beliefs against Taymor’s ancient/modern Rome, and believes this is a metaphor for violence and its lack of respect for time. Our responsibility as the audience is to figure out whether or not the acts

In great literature, or in literature in general, no scene of violence exists, or should exist for its own sake. Every scene of violence should contribute and reinforce to the plot of the work and to what is yet to come of the work. William Shakespeare successfully merges the acts of violence into a rational and coherent meaning and the audience can evidence that through the violence of act three, scene four in which the prince Hamlet of Denmark stabs and kills Polonius. Hamlet’s act of violence not only serves to illuminate important aspects of the play but also accentuates and forces certain themes into play and adds great meaning to the work as a whole.

In Ben Johnson’s “To the Memory of My Beloved, The Author, Mr. William Shakespeare, and What He Hath Left Us”, Johnson dictates a dramatically sycophantic poem in honor of the late William Shakespeare. With his superficial, dramatic style, Johnson unveils his own envious attitude within the unbegotten admiration he appoints throughout the poem. By complimenting Shakespeare through this ironic voice, Johnson insincerely praises Shakespeare’s legacy in a clever attempt to highlight Shakespeare’s minute but mentionable flaws. Throughout the commemorational poem, Johnson cleverly praises Shakespeare’s seemingly incomparable success as a poet by incorporating other famous poets as a belittling contrast. While meant as a friendly coup de grâce, Johnson’s assessment of Shakespeare is Johnson’s ultimate attempt to align himself with Shakespeare, bearing praise unto himself as well. In a poem meant to highlight and enunciate Shakespeare’s unparalleled skill and talent, Johnson instead attempts to expose his faults in hopes of bringing Shakespeare closer to himself.

Shakespeare’s first tragedy Titus Andronicus was a big hit; today how ever it is not regarded highly.

The effort and the input are sometimes not deserved or appropriate with reward in the future. In this play, the use of violent and brutal language helps the playwright and the characters to reveal people’s effort to achieve things that are not so much important or needed. That form of language is used to heighten the tension and create the impression that whatever is at stake is crucial, whereas in reality they are talking about love and marriage based on cheating and cunning. Shakespeare manages to reveal the hypocritical nature of the society where people will fight and defend their positions only to end up losing everything or having not gained anything in the first place. The use of brutal language is also tactical in the sense that Shakespeare is able to attract attention of the audience while convey his message of a brutal, insensitive

      Abstract:  The debate over the legitimacy of the authorship of Shakespearean works has been disputed for centuries. While many scholars have held beliefs that Shakespeare's works have been written by figures such as Christopher Marlowe, Francis Bacon, William Stanley, and others, the most heated debate today is between William Shakespeare and Edward DeVere, the Earl of Oxford. Each side of this debate has many followers, the Stratfordians, or those who claim Shakespeare to be the true author, and the Oxfordians who believe that true credit should go to DeVere. My paper, far from being a complete analysis of the possibilities of Shakespearean authorship, attempts to summarize and rationalize the

Titus Andronicus is a play marked by acts of horrific violence and littered with the deaths and the destruction of others. Each violent act in explaining and encouraging the motives of the characters. Revenge is the characters of Titus and Tamora’s only desire.

Shakespeare was a playwright from Stratford who had arguably the most influential affect on English literature and the English language. His works are still praised to this day for their divine superiority, however, controversy in exceeding amounts has risen over the dispute of his authorship. This controversy has been the topic of many arguments between differently opinionated scholars who support opposing theories and beliefs (Friedman XV). "A difficult dilemma confronts biographers who tell the story of the glove maker's son from Stratford-on-Avon who is supposed to have become the world's greatest poet and dramatist" (Whalen 3). It may seem odd that this confusion and doubt had come to light in the first place, as the origin of

In his essay in Bad Shakespeare, Anthony Dawson seems to disagree with this interpretation of the story. He states that this universal and idealized approach to the play is ineffective for a number of reasons. He

Whilst the Greek and Roman predecessors of revenge tragedy showed little compunction in gruesome on-stage violence, the Elizabethan spectators were, by the time of publication and performance of Shakespearian plays, a more educated audience who would appreciate the poetic style and subtle references to classical literature. This is not to say that the sixteenth century public were sensitive to acts of startling brutality; public executions and bear baiting were frequent occurrences that no doubt permeated the psyche of a nation. It has been argued that Shakespeare, conscious of his contemporaries' efforts in this genre decided to `out-do his predecessors' but a far more probable explanation is that Shakespeare, accommodating the

Few writers have managed to enter the world-wide public consciousness as well as Shakespeare; everyone knows his name and can terribly misquote his plays. Yet, for all his popularity, many of his critics have called him unlearned, saying his plays are entertaining but shallow. These same critics often point at the many inconsistencies of his writing, claiming that Shakespeare was not trying to convey anything but witticisms and beautiful sounds. Of course, even his harshest detractors acknowledge his plays and sonnets have influenced the world's literature on a scale that is intimidating; every writer of his era stood in his shadow, and modern literature stands on his

Not only is Macbeth by far the shortest of William Shakespeare’s great tragedies, but it is also anomalous in some structural respects. Like Othello (1604) and only a very few other Shakespearean plays, Macbeth is without the complications of a subplot. (Bradley, 1905) Consequently, the action moves forward in a swift and inexorable rush. More significantly, the climax the murder of Duncan takes place very early in the play. As a result, attention is focused on the various consequences of the crime rather than on the ambiguities or moral dilemmas that had