Shakespeare's Troilus and Cressida--Discussion and Summary

แชร์
ฝัง
  • เผยแพร่เมื่อ 1 ธ.ค. 2024

ความคิดเห็น • 21

  • @deln644
    @deln644 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    What a find! Thank you so much for your wonderful summary of Shakespeare's 'Troilus and Cressida', which I am currently reading. I love your description of Helen's worth in the story of the Trojan War. It reminds me of the so-called celebrities who appear each year in reality TV shows like Big Brother, The Real Housewives of..., Naked Attraction, Love Island and The Only Way is Essex, who consider themselves celebrities, but are simply vacuous, delusional 'pretty' people, who haven't got a brain cell to throw amongst them, watering down so-called 'celebrity' status until it has no worth. I shall listen to the others now. Wonderful! Thank you...

  • @princehide2650
    @princehide2650 2 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Great discussion and summary of Shakespeare's Troilus and Cressida.
    Throughout the story, Cressida knows how to wield her power over men. She uses such power for her advantage.

  • @Paulkazey1
    @Paulkazey1 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    A superb outline and interpretation. Brilliant. Thank you.

  • @justinheller7541
    @justinheller7541 4 ปีที่แล้ว +5

    Amazing video man. Thank you so much. This is one of the bards that I hardly know anything about. I’m looking at doing a Troilus monologue and this is a rly rly solid intro to the piece as a whole

    • @Nancenotes
      @Nancenotes  4 ปีที่แล้ว

      Glad I could help!

  • @siobhanmatshazi9655
    @siobhanmatshazi9655 4 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    this was such a good video. good work

  • @edmonddantes3688
    @edmonddantes3688 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Troilus could have said this to Cressida before he broke up with her:
    "I have heard of your paintings too, well enough. God hath given you one face, and you make yourselves another. You jig, you amble, and you lisp, and nickname God’s creatures, and make your wantonness your ignorance." - Hamlet

    • @Nancenotes
      @Nancenotes  2 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      Get thee to a nunnery! (Not Diomedes!)

  • @gaileverett
    @gaileverett 8 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Excellent!

  • @estherm.9934
    @estherm.9934 3 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    Hello! I've been watching your videos for a while as I'm studying Shakespeare for my upcoming uni exams (which are very helpful, so thank you for them!), and I've just stumbled upon studying 'Troilus and Cressida', but I think I'm not understanding one particular thing. I know this is far from the subject of the entire play, but wasn't Achilles in love with Patroclus and was spending time with him rather than some other woman? I didn't read the play, so I could be wrong, but everywhere I've read, they always mention Patroclus with Achilles and not a woman. :)

    • @Nancenotes
      @Nancenotes  3 ปีที่แล้ว +4

      Thersites thinks so, but he's a dubious perspective on anything. It's helpful to compare Shakespeare's version to the famous source material, the Illiad. In the Illiad, Achilles both sulks over the loss of a female (sex) slave and has an intense affection for Patroclus. His actions and motives are discussed at length in terms of his heroism and weakness both within the story and through the many commentaries on the story throughout the years--and all of this is generally in terms of relationships with the male and the female and what those mean symbolically. It's also interesting to look at Plato's exploration and response to these things: Achilles' emotions and his pouting over a woman is weak and womanly, according to Plato. Elsewhere, his love for Patroclus is considered noble because it drives him to heroic action. There are also several other Greek texts about sexuality and love, which make for a contextualization of the original poem (See Plato's Symposium). So, yes, the source material and commentary explores this idea in some depth. But does Shakespeare? Well, it's not the motivation in the forefront for sure. When I say that there's a woman who's asked Achilles not to fight, I'm talking about his promise to Hector's sister with whom he is apparently enamored (see the discussion between Ulysses and Achilles in Act III.iii), and this point seems to be an echo of the "ruled by desire for a woman" issue from the original. (Her identity is why he's not actually spending time with her here--she's in Troy.) BUT Patroclus also suggests that, at least from the perspective of the rest of the Greeks, Achilles is refusing to fight for his sake--because Patroclus is afraid: "They think my little stomach to the war/
      And your great love to me restrains you thus" (also III.iii). But both of these are casually mentioned motives--neither is connected with any certainty to what he's doing or why. Likewise, neither of these is really the focus of Achilles' characterization--he's a selfish jerk basking in his past success, enjoying living it up and mocking the current leadership rather than doing anything to improve their situation. And when he does finally lift a finger to help, he's a lazy fighter, who uses unfair advantage to take out an unarmed man and then take credit/glory for something he really didn't do. It doesn't seem like love of any kind plays into his actions, except the love of himself and his ego. Hopefully, this explanation helps. Thanks for asking an interesting question.

    • @estherm.9934
      @estherm.9934 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@Nancenotes That explanation helps a lot. Thank you very much! I didn't read the play, as I currently have no time to do so, therefore, I was having trouble understanding certain things when reading the synopsis and watching the video. But once again, thank you!

  • @manuellermer871
    @manuellermer871 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Hey! I do have to write an essay about Troilus and Cressida and I would like to write about a fact you mentioned: "Why are characters who dont fight always influenced by women?" Since I do not understand alot of the book (My english is not the best...) I wanted to ask you if you have any thoghts or further ideas to help me out to finish the essay.
    Best wishes,
    Manuel

    • @Nancenotes
      @Nancenotes  3 ปีที่แล้ว

      You might look at my response to other comments on this video-I’ve talked about this a bit more there. Good luck!

  • @tomservo75
    @tomservo75 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

    I watched this play for the first time last week. I think my biggest issue (again it was only the first viewing) was the complexity and how many characters there are with so many different motives I couldn't really keep track of the plot. It doesn't help that the production I was watching was just awful. It was the RSC performance from about 5 years ago and it was done in a very artsy, over-the-top way, and, oh shall we say... poor casting choices. This was not the right production to be introduced to the play with. I'm going to try and watch the 1980s BBC production tonight, something that's played more straightforward and maybe I'll have better luck. But again it was confusing because there were so many characters mostly with small roles.

    • @Nancenotes
      @Nancenotes  6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Was that the weird Mad Max style one? I didn’t see it, but saw the promo pictures.

  • @ShakespearewithSarah
    @ShakespearewithSarah 4 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    I loved this video. I've never found this play terribly engaging because the characters are so unlikeable! So few redeeming qualities. And as you say, it's very disillusioned. Stone cold bummer of a play 😂

    • @Nancenotes
      @Nancenotes  4 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      Yeah! It’s one that you can enjoy for its cynicism, and then set it aside and go back to Merry Wives of Windsor for the fun and rereads.

    • @ShakespearewithSarah
      @ShakespearewithSarah 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@Nancenotes Bahaha so true 😂😂😂