- Choose TWO of the following texts for comparison:
The Duchess of Malfi
Paradise Lost
The Beggar’s Opera
Consider a theme common to both texts. Make an argument that relates how certain formal elements function to develop that theme in the texts you have chosen. How do the elements you highlight contribute to the argument the texts are making about that theme? You may consider images, landscape descriptions, stage settings, stage properties, costumes, scene structure, character development, literary devices, and/or language and speech patterns, for example. (You will, of course, inevitably address aspects of plot as you answer this question, but that element should not be your specific focus.)
- Choose ONE poem from TWO of the poets for comparison from the collection of sonnets and metaphysical poetry on the syllabus by Sidney, Spenser, Shakespeare, Wroth, Milton, Donne, Herbert, and Marvell.
Consider a theme common to both texts. Make an argument that relates how certain formal elements function to develop that theme in the texts you’ve chosen. How do the elements you highlight contribute to the argument the poems’ speakers are making about that theme? You may consider such elements as images, metaphors, conceits, sound, meter, and/or Petrarchan conventions/motifs, for example.
You may consider the following suggestions for theme if you wish for either question, but you are free to choose your own.
the faithful (and/or unfaithful) servant / service
ambition / pride
the unruly woman / female desire
money and marriage
social disruption / class distinctions
deception and illusion / seeming and being
crime and punishment / justice and revenge
sin and salvation
competing drives toward fruitfulness and ruin
love / sex / desire
writing / authorship
Sample Solution
he English elucidation was Arthur Brooke’s Tragical History of Romeus and Juliet (1562), a verse of 3020 lines two by two and poultry with lines pivoting around 12 and 14 syllables. This relied upon the French translation of Bandello’s epic by Boaistuau in Italian. Journalists in Shakespeare’s chance were amazing arbor-winged animals: getting from various sources and in any event, taking them eventually. Shakespeare took plots, exchanges, names and titles of char The Duchess of Malfi acters. Be that as it may, this was a standard practice: Plots and characters were ordinary property for Elizabethan journalists. At the time, there were no copyright laws and there was a free feeling of ensured development. What Shakespeare kept and what he changed from his one of a kind sources is particularly exceptional. The movements of Shakespeare to the story prompt his characteristics as an essayist. He has numerous verbal parallels with Brooke and has ingested warm nights and unexpected thunder storms into the Italian summer condition. In any case, the principal verses were surrounded as a significantly more notification to youngsters who neglected to conform to their kin and examined the outcomes that would result from such conduct. It is intriguing to peruse Brooke’s location “To the peruser,” which presents his work with a particular ultimate objective to esteem the less informative methodology of Shakespeare. Brooke states: “Additionally, to this end, incredible Reader, is this tragical issue formed, to depict unto thee a couple of lamentable darlings, thralling themselves to unhonest need; ignoring the master and appeal of watchmen and colleagues; meeting their basic guides with intoxicated snitches and superstitious pastors (the ordinarily fit instruments of unchastity); attempting all encounters of risk for th’ accomplishing of their wished want; using auricular confirmation the key of whoredom and foul play, for consolation of their inspiration; abusing the reasonable name of lawful union with cover the disrespect of taken agreements; finally by all techniques for unhonest life flurrying to most hopeless downfall.” Shakespeare made sense of how to move past this, giving independence and importance to the youthful darling The Duchess of Malfi s, uncovering how grown-up blunders alone can influence the destiny of youngsters. As Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet pull in a close by father of Juliet, Capulet, gandering at the gatherings of the two youthful darlings, says they are “poor retributions for our enmity.” Shakespeare doesn’t pass judgment on youthful choices as a moralist. He just gives us three-dimensional characters, living certified lives and enabling their humankind to unravel: As Harold Bloom says, “Shakespeare stays a shortcoming once more.” The difficulty of youthful darlings has addressed both>
he English elucidation was Arthur Brooke’s Tragical History of Romeus and Juliet (1562), a verse of 3020 lines two by two and poultry with lines pivoting around 12 and 14 syllables. This relied upon the French translation of Bandello’s epic by Boaistuau in Italian. Journalists in Shakespeare’s chance were amazing arbor-winged animals: getting from various sources and in any event, taking them eventually. Shakespeare took plots, exchanges, names and titles of characters. Be that as it may, this was a standard practice: Plots and characters were ordinary property for Elizabethan journalists. At the time, there were no copyright laws and there was a free feeling of ensured development. What Shakespeare kept and what he changed from his one of a kind sources is particularly exceptional. The movements of Shakespeare to the story prompt his characteristics as an essayist. He has numerous verbal parallels with Brooke and has ingested warm nights and unexpected thunder storms into the Italian summer condition. In any case, the principal verses were surrounded as a significantly more notification to youngsters who neglected to conform to their kin and examined the outcomes that would result from such conduct. It is intriguing to peruse Brooke’s location “To the peruser,” which presents his work with a particular ultimate objective to esteem the less informative methodology of Shakespeare. Brooke states: “Additionally, to this end, incredible Reader, is this tragical issue formed, to depict unto thee a couple of lamentable darlings, thralling themselves to unhonest need; ignoring the master and appeal of w The Duchess of Malfi atchmen and colleagues; meeting their basic guides with intoxicated snitches and superstitious pastors (the ordinarily fit instruments of unchastity); attempting all encounters of risk for th’ accomplishing of their wished want; using auricular confirmation the key of whoredom and foul play, for consolation of their inspiration; abusing the reasonable name of lawful union with cover the disrespect of taken agreements; finally by all techniques for unhonest life flurrying to most hopeless downfall.” Shakespeare made sense of how to move past this, giving independence and importance to the youthful darlings, uncovering how grown-up blunders alone can influence the destiny of youngsters. As Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet pull in a close by father of Juliet, Capu The Duchess of Malfi let, gandering at the gatherings of the two youthful darlings, says they are “poor retributions for our enmity.” Shakespeare doesn’t pass judgment on youthful choices as a moralist. He just gives us three-dimensional characters, living certified lives and enabling their humankind to unravel: As Harold Bloom says, “Shakespeare stays a shortcoming once more.” The difficulty of youthful darlings has addressed both>
