3/28/2020 0 Comments
Disguise is often presented as a cruel and painful practice. To what extent do you agree that disguise is used to create comic moments in twelfth night? Shakespeare incorporates the technique of disguise in the twelfth night to create comedic elements in the play; however some may argue that the concept of disguise is often cruel as it creates confusion and misconceptions that could lead to serious consequences. In Shakespearian times the role of women was restricted to usually their own homes and this was the case on the stage in Shakespeareâ€™s plays.All of the actors were men even in the women roles. This could be one of the first techniques of disguise that Shakespeare used that could portray comedy as a man in a feminine role is comedic however, it also puts across confusion especially in plays like the twelfth night where characters like Viola plays a role as a male persona. Viola is the main and obvious element of disguise in the twelfth night. She creates the comic aspect of the play as dramatic irony is depicted because none of the characters know that Cesario, the person who she has created through her disguise, is really a woman.Her character creates a sort of love triangle between her, Olivia and Orsino but she can reveal nothing in fear of exposing her identity, â€œwhoeâ€™er I woo, myself would be his wifeâ€ (Act 1 Scene 4). The cruel and painful practice is uncovered through this as Olivia doesnâ€™t know that the person she is falling for is in fact a women and Viola can do nothing to let her know this, leading Olivia on into something that canâ€™t happen. This is also the case with Viola as she canâ€™t proclaim her love for Orsino.Shakespeare creates torment mainly in the mind of Viola as the fate is ultimately in her hands but the disguise has restricted her. The constraint of her identity is a problem or arguably the comedic side of the twelfth night. In act 3 scene 4 Sir Toby create a duel between Sir Andrew and Viola against both their wills, â€œSir Andrew and Viola draw their swordsâ€. The disguise has gone against her as all the on looking characters believe that Sir Andrew is fighting a man when it is actually a woman which no one would consider fair, another example of where the hidden identity leads to a cruel practice.The idea of Viola dressing up as a man in the first place could also be considered a cruel practice as it shows that she is aware that her being a women she may be disregarded socially which is why she takes on the disguise in the first place, this highlights the patriarchal society in Shakespearian times that reflects on the play. Malvolio is another character who takes on some sort of disguise in the hope of pleasing the supposed wishes of his lady Olivia, â€œI thank my stars, I am happy!I will be strange, stout, in yellow stockings, and cross gartered, even with the swiftness of putting on. Jove and my stars be praised! â€ (Act 2 Scene 5). Maria, Sir Toby, Sir Andrew and Feste all trick Malvolio into wearing the clothes that lady Olivia hates and Malvolio being naive and arrogant falls for this. The outcome was meant to be comedic for Maria and her friends and the audience also share the laughs simply because of foolishness of Malvolio and the new dress sense he takes.The way in which this comedy came about however, came from a very malicious plan orchestrated by Maria as the idea of trickery was involved which caused Malvolio to believe that Lady Olivia loves him. The audience who also share the comedy canâ€™t help but feel some sort of remorse for Malvolio. Malvolio putting on the cross gartered yellow socks lead him to being put away in the so called prison. Feste takes the role of Sir Topas the priest in order to trick Malvolio into thinking that he has gone insane, â€œSir Topas the curate, who comes to visit Malvolio the lunaticâ€ (Act 4 Scene 2).The room in which Malvolio is locked into is dark so he couldnâ€™t see if it were actually Sir Topas even though we know it isnâ€™t. Feste didnâ€™t have to take the disguise of Sir Topas but rather just sound like him, this shows the effect of a disguise as he chooses to dress like the priest to possibly get into character to portray the character more clearly. This is very cruel as Feste uses trickery and confusion to show Malvolio to be something heâ€™s not and also make him believe that a Priest is consulting him.Ultimately the technique of disguise is often used to create a hidden identity and confusion between characters, Shakespeare however, uses this technique to create comic elements as well. As brought up before we find that the sexual confusion love triangle between Olivia, Orsino and the Viola/Cesario character creates comedy. Olivia as we know falls for Cesario whoâ€™s a women, but we also find that Orsino may be attracted to Cesario in a way, in plain terms this is acceptable as sheâ€™s a women but he addresses her as a male which raises the question of what Shakespeare is trying to outline.This is shown â€œThat say thou art a man: Diana's lip Is not more smooth and rubious; thy small pipe Is as the maiden's organ, shrill and sound, And all is semblative a woman's partâ€ (Act 1 Scene 4). Shakespeare may be trying to achieve something more than comedy by saying that disguise may bring out other elements. The other aspect of comedy was explored when Malvolio was tricked by the letter into wearing the disguise which consequently caused the imprisonment of him, which could then be argued is a painful practice.The disguise of Viola also causes the cruel treating of Antonio as he claims to have been with Viola/Cesario for 3 months and that they were together when they came to the town and Orsino and Viola clearly know that she has been working with Orsino, the confusion between Viola and Sebastian because of the disguise is evident; â€œToday, my lord and for three months before no intâ€™rim, not a minuteâ€™s vacancy, both day and night did we keep companyâ€ (Act 5 Scene 1).When all disguises from Violaâ€™s to Festeâ€™s and the reason behind Malvolioâ€™s disguise is all revealed Shakespeare once again brings order after all had gone astray. There is no comic factor when all is exposed but there is in fact a sense of sorrow for Malvolio as everyone is happy apart from him. This could show that there is no positives in disguise and eventually it will lead to a cruel ending in this case Malvolio suffered the consequences.
Using quotations from at least three written texts (ancient and/or modern), argue the case for or against the view that only Christian believers can or should be theologians Before attempting to answer this question, one must define some principles of the nature of Christian theology. It is obvious that anyone may create a theology based purely on ideas from oneâ€™s own imagination, with no boundaries or guidelines to it. Such a theology may be creative, intelligent, and reasonable, but could not be classed as Christian theology. Something must act as a rule and a guard, lest the Christian religion break down into nothing more than dispersed, individual, self-made theologies. Theology in a Christian context must and does find its foundation in Scripture, â€œthe supreme authority to life and thoughtâ€ (Vanhoozer 1998, p. 380). Now that the thing that is to be interpreted in the building of Christian theology has been identified as Scripture, one may ask the question of who is able and qualified to interpret it. In 1860, Benjamin Jowett published his essay, â€œOn the Interpretation of Scriptureâ€. He argued that the Bible should be regarded as any other ancient collections of literature, using tools of literary and historical scholarship. He implied that a critic who stands apart from traditional beliefs and practices is in a better position to find the true meaning of the text, as these traditions had obscured their true meaning. In other words, only those with the right scholarly tools and who were willing to suspend any belief in the text that they may have are able to correctly interpret it (Vanhoozer 1998, pp. 378-379). However, Jowettâ€™s view of interpretation omits the spiritual and the ethical dimensions of Biblical interpretation. Vanhoozer writes: To call the Bible Scripture does not make its warnings or its promises something other than warnings or promises, but rather reorients them to the larger purpose of â€œmaking wise unto salvationâ€¦ â€œ. (Vanhoozer 1998, p. 380). Jowettâ€™s approach to interpretation requires an objective reading of the text. But can one properly interpret the Scriptures from such a standpoint? To answer this, one must examine the relationship between the reader, the text, the author, and the story. Upon reading, the reader reads the text, and in doing so reconstructs the author in his own imagination, creating an â€˜implied authorâ€™, and bringing the story to life (actualising the text) from the marks on the written page (Voelz 1995, 1997, pp. 218- 219). Voelz goes on to state that the intended recipient of the text is: â€¦a reader of whom the author is conscious, one who may also be called â€œimpliedâ€. And this implied reader stands in the same relationship to the actual reader as the implied author stands to the actual author; he is, again, a construct, not in the real world, and he is detectable (only) in the text. Who then is a valid interpreter of a text? It is he who conforms to the expectations of the author. It is he who conforms himself to the given textâ€™s assumptions. It is he who becomes the implied reader â€“ and only such a one â€“ of a given text. Which means that an â€œobjectiveâ€ reading of a text is not only impossible; it is not to be desired! (Voelz 1995, 1997, p. 219) One can see that what is needed for correct interpretation of Scripture, is a subjective, rather than objective reading of the text. Voelz argues a reader interprets within a community, having developed the beliefs and attitudes of the implied reader, through discussion, experience, and training within that community which understands and appreciates the context of the â€œimplied readerâ€. Therefore: A valid interpreter of a textâ€¦ is that personâ€¦ who assumes the role â€œrequiredâ€ as it were, by a given text â€“ who becomes the reader â€œimpliedâ€ or called for by that very text. And such a one is formed to assume that role by a community, a community which has assumed that role itself. (Voelz 1995, 1997, p. 220) This, however, does not make every Christian communityâ€™s interpretation infallible, because humans err; thus different Christian communities often disagree on the interpretation of certain parts of Scripture. But, as the Church is a community within which these documents were produced, received, and preserved, Vanhoozer states: [The] Bible is more likely to be misunderstood by an unbelieving and unaffiliated individual than by a believing and practising member of the church. (Vanhoozer 1998, p. 378) In the case of the New Testament, the books were produced, received, and preserved by the Christian community, and following Voelzâ€™s argument, one has to be within a Christian community, and taught to read Scripture by that community, to be able to correctly interpret the New Testament. The issue of the interpretation of the Old Testament is one that is referred to in the New Testament. Speaking of the reading of Scripture by the Jews: Yes, to this day, whenever Moses is read a veil lies over their hearts. But when one turns to the Lord, the veil is removed. (2 Cor. 3:15-16 ESV) According to Paulâ€™s argument, the Jews do not believe, therefore they cannot, in their unbelieving state, be the â€œimplied readerâ€ of the Old Testament Scriptures. Apparently, simply being within the Jewish community is insufficient to correctly interpret these Scriptures, as more than a simple, straightforward understanding of the Hebrew text is needed. Luke 24:45 ESV reads, concerning Jesus and his disciples, â€œThen he opened their minds to understand the Scriptures.â€ Minds must be opened, veils taken away. The Christian community must teach readers to interpret even the Old Testament books. Only within the Christian community can oneâ€™s mind be changed in the proper way (Voelz 1995, 1997, p. 226). The reason for this is clear from the New Testamentâ€™s claims regarding the Christocentricity of all Scripture, Old and New Testaments: You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that bear witness about meâ€¦ (Jn. 5:39 ESV. Cf. Mt. 2:4-6, 14-15; 1 Cor. 10:11, 15:3-4; 2 Cor. 1:20; Heb. 9:11-12; 1 Pet. 1:10-12) In order to be within the Christian community, one must adhere to and confess its creeds. Voelz writes: Therefore, to adhere to the creeds gives one an orientation to the books of the NTâ€¦. which is â€œcongenialâ€ to them and whichâ€¦ allows/enables one to interpret them in accordance with their intentionâ€¦ [Adherence] to the creeds enables one to â€œmatrixâ€ the signifiers and meanings of a text for interpretation and then to interpret that matrix in a way which is â€œcongenialâ€ to the text, for the creeds are of one piece with that text and provide, as it were, the interpretive â€œkey,â€â€¦â€determinative for the meaning of the complex signifiers under constructionâ€â€¦ [The] creeds help to determine which readings of Scripture are the apostolic/Christian readings which may legitimately be drawn from them. (Voelz 1995, 1997, p. 222) It was precisely the misuse of Scripture by heretics, which caused the early Church father, Tertullian, to write regarding them: [We] oppose to them this step above all others, of not admitting them to any discussion of the Scriptures. If in these lie their resources, before they can use them, it ought to be clearly seen to whom belongs the possession of the Scriptures, that none may be admitted to the use thereof who has no title at all to the privilege. (Roberts & Donaldson 1994, 1995, Vol. 1 p.250 -Chapter XV of On Prescription Against Heretics. See also: chapters XVI, XVII, XVIII, XIX pp. 250-252) Tertullianâ€™s belief was that the Scriptures were the property of the Christian Church alone, and not to be handled by those outside of it. Irenaeus, Bishop of Lyons, against the Valentinians, wrote: [They] endeavour to adapt with an air of probability to their own peculiar assertions the parables of the Lord, the sayings of the prophets, and the words of the apostles, in order that their scheme may not seem altogether without support. In doing so, however, they disregard the order and the connection of the Scriptures, and so far as in them lies, dismember and destroy the truth. By transferring passages, and dressing them up anew, and making one thing out of another, they succeed in deluding many through their wicked art in adapting the oracles of the Lord to their opinions. (Roberts & Donaldson 1994, 1995, Vol. 3. p. 326 -Chapter VIII of Against Heresies) In conclusion, there seem to be many problems opposing the idea of those outside of the Christian Church being theologians, not least the question of motive, as the early Church fathers addressed. For these reasons, I believe that theology is a matter only for those within the Church. Bibliography * Roberts, A. & Donaldson J. (Editors); 1994, 1995; Ante-Nicene Fathers; Peabody, Massachusetts; Hendrickson Publishers, Inc. * Vanhoozer, K. 1998; Is There a Meaning in This Text?; Leicester; Apollos/IVP. * Voelz, J. 1995, 1997; What Does This Mean?: Principles of Biblical Interpretation in the Post-Modern World; St. Louis, Missouri; Concordia Publishing House. * The Holy Bible â€“ English Standard Version; 2001, 2002; Wheaton, Illinois; Crossway Bibles
Write something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview.