Just as A.J. has spouted the praises of Prof. Davies, so must I for Prof. Kelly. We did the exact same sections as A.J. and I really got a lot of mileage about thinking about each moment. Too often I as an actor need that outside person slowing me down to think about each line and each moment and the movement from one to another. Too often I get comfortable with an assumed connective tendancy and don't consider other stronger possibilities. Too often I need a director. Paraphrasing ASC style helps me consider moments slowly, but again, I will often allow myself to relax into one reading and not explore on my own.
I hate to once again engage A.J. in discussion, but I must. I think it's interesting that you stated that Proteus raises questions first "then he goes to think on what he's just said, and comes back with his answers". This does not seem to align with the beginning of the 2.6 monologue where he is still clearly questioning his intentions and what to do. In fact it takes Proteus 3/4 of that second monologue before he iterates "I will forget that Julia is alive,/ Remembering that my love for her is dead". This does not create the easy binary that you have suggested; rather for me, it indicates the tensions and the complexity of his consideration. There is no easy answer and he must firmly convince himself of his rightness. I do admit that throughout BOTH speeches he has a alacrity in his propensity to love Sylvia, but he does not answer his questions until he has a solution. I guess we may say he has potential answers, but the finality of that word answer does not satisfy me in characterizing 2.6. Again, to A.J. I'm glad that we constantly have discussions though no one else on the blog seems to want to do so...
Hey Michael,
ReplyDeleteI do agree with your assessment of the soliloquies, actually. Me thinking of them as a "question and answer" pair, with off stage thinking in the middle, was to justify to myself why it is he has two long monologues about the same topic in such a short time span, only being separated by a clown and fool scene? If ol' Wigglestaff wanted to show that Proteus was spending a great deal of time thinking about the topic, which seems to be suggested by not one, but two soliloquies, then why put them so close together that they seem to almost be one long monologue? Why not space them out over a few scenes? It really feels like he comes up with the feelings, talks about what his feelings are and goes off to try to figure them out. When he comes back, the tone is significantly different. He is talking about the consequences to his feelings and his impending actions. The "going away and thinking" part of my assessment is, at least, valid (if not sound). Shakespeare is seeming to suggest, in my view, that Proteus needs time to go think about the big issues, but comes to a rash decision.
I agree with this assessment and think that you are being more precise here than in your earlier post. But I would suggest that to a certain extent this could be one long monologue. For all know, especially considering the way in which you point out that Shakespeare puts these so close together, This occurs almost immediately after the other one. Time has never been a key concern of the Bard. But I agree the tone is different and he is definitely considering things in a more permanent way in the second while he tries to leave the first more open. Though I cannot help but notice that the first throughout seems to lean toward Sylvia... Anyway, I'm curious about this needing time to consider idea in light of your most recent post... But I'm about to go comment on that there.
ReplyDelete