Paulina’s Guise (The Winter’s Tale, Act III Scene II)

Posted on December 3, 2013 by kl131219

(The following post contains spoilers to the end of The Winter’s Tale)

While Paulina’s account of Hermione’s death may seem shocking and quite feverish in its delivery, with the later ‘reanimation’ of the Queen in mind, it is possible to read her delivery as a kind of act to disguise the truth of Hermione’s death.  Even before Paulina has left and returned to announce the Queen’s death, she hints at the potential fatality, she states, “This news is mortal to the Queen–look down / And see what death is doing.” This foreboding warning to Leontes cannot be mere happenstance. Perhaps Paulina and Hermione have decided to take advantage of her sons death in order to escape from the rampaging madness and rashness of the king. This would also allow Hermione to live a (relatively) free life, until the events of the play would allow for her return.

Paulina’s sudden hysterical reaction to Hermione’s death can easily be interpreted as an expression of grief for her departed mistress. Yet, Paulina’s previous behaviour in the play depicts her as an observant and persistent person. Even when she playfully calls Leontes a tyrant when she attempts to present his new born child to him, she remains witty and logical in her banter and advice/condemnation. To suddenly turn so explosive, so explicitly brutal in her tone and speech, is a auspicious turn of character for Paulina.

“What studied torments, tyrant, hast for me? / What wheels, racks, fires? What flaying, boiling / In lead or oils?.”

Later when questioned about her explosive behaviour  by one of the gentlemen at court, Paulina rationalizes her actions as “the rashness of a woman.” This posture of Paulina’s could further indicate her pretense of Hermione’s death. Paulina understands the benefits that this performance affords her.  Socially, her role as a woman excuses her irrational behaviour, and by fulfilling that expected role of the over-emotional grief stricken woman, by conceding to these conventions (and hiding her normally rational behaviour–thus allowing Paulina to overcome this particular branch of madness, implying perhaps another win for the distaff sphere) Paulina can successfully hide the death of the Queen and convince the court of her sincerity.

Posted in Comedy, Life vs. Death, Love relationships, Power struggles, Psychological detail, Tragedy | Comments Off on Paulina’s Guise (The Winter’s Tale, Act III Scene II)

Comparison of Prodigal Sons

Posted on May 24, 2013 by Melissa Salamat

What I first noticed about Wellborn’s character was his description: ‘a prodigal’. The only other time I’ve heard the term ‘prodigal’ is from the Bible passage in the New Testament. Both Wellborn and the unnamed son personify the word ‘prodigal’ in that they squandered away the wealth and inheritance given to them by their fathers. However, that is where the similarities end. The son from the Bible passage returned home to his father in a state of remorse. The most notable point in the parable is that the father doesn’t punish or disown his son, but welcomes him with open arms. Unfortunately, Wellborn did not have this opportunity.

Wellborn’s father had passed away and he didn’t have any other relatives to turn to. His uncle, Overreach wanted nothing to do with him. He had to raise himself up from his own efforts and what is extremely commendable of him was that he didn’t accept the charity of others. If he was to atone for his past mistakes, he wanted to do it honorably. I found this a pleasant surprise after being introduced to him in a negative light by the other characters.

It’s interesting to find such a clear character to root for while in many of the other plays we’ve read, it is not so easy. Even the fact the Overreach was made to act so evil shows the playwrights intention at making transparent characters. Even to the end when Wellborn has gained access to a comfortable lifestyle again, he chooses to serve as a soldier. In both cases, the sons are able to turn over a new leaf. The title brings justice to a another take of a prodigal son, A New Way to Pay Old Debts.

Posted in A New Way to Pay Old Debts | 1 Comment

A Very Modern Character

Posted on May 22, 2013 by peter d'antonio

Before having read even a line of New Way To Pay Old Debts, I was immediately impressed by its title. At least to me, it seemed extremely modern and not unlike titles being created nowadays. Upon reading the play however, it struck me that the title was far from the only thing linking the play with our world at present. In fact, I’m pretty sure if you were to transport character, Giles Overreach, to the New York of today, he’d blend in a bit too seamlessly for comfort. In fact, his voracity for individual ruination would probably be welcomed in certain areas south of Fulton Street.

As a villain, he is scary because he is real; when he is out for you, he robs you blindly with calculation and without pretense. What drives this obsession of his? Perhaps, it is as he says simply the joy he gets from doing so…but even then, you can ask why? And I think for Overreach, it has to do with class and his natural born ‘disadvantage’. Since he himself could never ascend the social order on his own merits, he might as well have amassed a wealth at the cost of everyone else, at the chance that his daughter would one day be able to. Of course this doesn’t excuse any of his actions, but it does at least give some reason as to why he acted as he did; in our world today, with significantly less rigid social strata, such an explanation fails to apply, and yet the Giles still persist.

Posted in A New Way to Pay Old Debts | 1 Comment

Madness – the sign of villainy without the cover of rationality/humanity

Posted on May 22, 2013 by Lyaman

At the end of the play, A New Way to Pay Old Debts, the antagonist – the villain – of the play, Sir Giles Overreach goes mad. It reminded me a lot of how at the end of The Duchess of Malfi, the villain of that play (or one of them at least) also goes mad, thinking he is a werewolf.

It seems as if madness, at least in these two plays, serves as the ultimate punishment. But madness also seems to serve as the signal of complete separation from reason, and humanity. Ferdinand in The Duchess of Malfi was already compared to animals through out the play for his villainy, but that final act of betraying his sister and ordering her and her children’s death seems to be the final act that takes away his humanity – and drives him into madness.

(As for Sir Giles Overreach, he’s no peach.) He is ruthless, unfair, merciless, man who has made his fortune through “usury,” who acts very much like the puppet master, and who despite his amassed wealth has not been able to break though the upper echelons of the society – leading to his quest to marry off his daughter into aristocracy. That is his driving force – to have his legacy (progeny)  connected with nobility. When that driving force is taken away, when his daughter married a mere page boy, and he loses the estate he cheated Wellborn out of,  the string that has been keeping him tethered to rationality and humanity is cut and his depravity takes hold, which without a goal or purpose leads to his madness.

Madness of the villains seems to be the portrayal of a person whose disguise of rationality and humanity is taken away to reveal their inner depravity and villainy.

Posted in A New Way to Pay Old Debts | Tagged , , | 2 Comments

Judgement of Females in Literature

Posted on May 21, 2013 by Lyaman

Recently I read an article, Do We Judge Female Characters More Harshly Than Male Characters?  It brought up an interesting point about gender perception and the work done by social psychologists that “has repeatedly demonstrated that women are perceived and evaluated on a different criteria than men. Some traits seen as positive in one is seen as negative in the other ..such as assertiveness is seen as a positive trait in a male and in a female it is seen as pushiness, or a lack of warmth is acceptable in men but in women it can be a deadly (in terms of perception by others).” The discussion followed by how it translates to literature as well and how the female characters are evaluated against a different scale than their male counterparts.

It made me think about the character of Beatrice Joanna in The Changeling. There is no doubt that she is a villain, but the characteristics she exhibited are very similar to those we have seen in the “new men” in the different plays we have read this semester. And yet, as a female she is giving the harsher judgment, which as the ending of the play reaffirms shows it holds true….because it is De Flores who confesses the full extent of their crimes and kills her and himself.

While I am in no way trying to defend her as a character, there are some points that should be considered. And one of those points is the fact that in any other situation, and through our modern eyes, De Flores was basically stalking and sexually harassing Beatrice Joanna. Yes she was mean to him, but it wasn’t completely unprovoked. She also had very little choice and control over her own life, as many women of that time, as it was her father who would decide who she would marry….even if she did not want to.

But putting aside Beatrice Joanna, that double standard of character evaluation holds true even when applied to other characters. We praise Isabella for her virtuousness to her bastard of a husband, Celia for her goodness…and even with the Duchess and Julia there is the ingrained comparison of the moral virtuousness of the female character.

It does cause me as a reader to reevaluate, if not precisely how I evaluate what I read and judge characters, then at least how those judgements differ between genders and if the judgment would be the same if the gender was taken out of context.

Posted in The Changeling, The Duchess of Malfi, Tragedy | Tagged , , | 1 Comment

Beatrice-Joanna vs. Bel-Imperia

Posted on May 21, 2013 by Angelic Rivera

Due to the rapidity of with which Bel-Imperia falls in love again, it is easy to doubt the degree of her love for Horatio and even for Andrea. Not long after Andrea’s death, Bel-Imperia was already interested in Horatio. Her servant Pedringano tells Lorenzo about her feelings towards Horatio “She loves Horatio.” (2.1.79) Once again, Bel-Imperia falls in love with someone of whom her father does not approve. It is questionable whether she loves these men, or loves the freedom these men can provide her since they are not in the same social class as her. The play does not clearly depict Bel-Imperia’s feelings clearly. It seems as though Bel-Imperia merely decides with whom she will fall in love with, but her psychological details are not provided. Bel-Imperia fought for Horatio’s revenge and ultimately ended her own life.  Bel-Imperia even resented Hieronimo for believing he was not seeking revenge, even if revenge meant going against her own brother Lorenzo. She wanted to take revenge onto her own hands “And give it over and devise no more, / Myself should send their hateful souls to hell / That wrought his downfall with extremest death.” (4.1.27-29). She helped Hieronimo with his plays to seek revenge against Lorenzo and Balthazar. Bel-Imperia was loyal to Horatio, even after his death.

Similar to this is Beatrice- Joanna. It is questionable if she truly loved Alsemero or just wanted things to go her way. Although Bel-Imperia killed for revenge, Beatrice-Joanna killed to marry to Alsemero. It can also be questionable why Beatrice-Joanna did not love Alonzo. The play never goes in detail as to why she did not want to marry Alonzo, but instead quickly falls in love with Alsemero. Beatrice-Joanna does in fact later admit to Alsemero what she has done, and that she did it for him.

Posted in The Changeling, The Spanish Tragedy | 1 Comment

The Downfall of Giles Overreach

Posted on May 19, 2013 by Sabrina Esclavon

A New Way To Pay Old Debts is a play in which the audience finds themselves truly rooting for the downfall of the bad guy.  This is different from some of the other plays we have read as most of the characters are all mixed up in circumstances that lead to terrible deeds being done by a multitude of characters.  While A New Way To Pay Old Debts does have its share of bad things being done onto others, there is a clear distinction between who is right and who is wrong.  The character of Giles Overreach feels entitled to whatever he sets his eyes on and has no moral limit as to what he will do to get it.  In contrast to the characters of Frank Wellborn and Lady Allworth who are aristocrats, Overreach has climbed up the societal ladder through unsavory means.  This connects to another major theme in the play, which is how the author portrays differences between the aristocratic class and the working class.

While Wellborn and Lady Allworth were born into money, Overreach lets the audience know fast that he has personally acquired his wealth over the years.  However, he is no hard worker having earnestly earned his new status.  This is important, because through this character choice, the author creates a clear distinction between social status; that those who are born into money are inherently better, both in morals and intelligence.  Although Overreach was able to scam Frank out of his wealth, leaving him nothing but a poor has-been, Wellborn and Lady Alllworth are still able to outsmart him, playing on his own tactics to rob him of his riches.  Overreach’s grandiose ambitions and sense of self blind him, making him not susceptible to only Wellborn’s plan, but to Lovell’s plan as well.  In the end, we see the crash and burn of Giles Overreach, ultimately being left with the idea that although he was able to acquire a higher social status, he could never make up for what he was lacking on the inside.

Posted in A New Way to Pay Old Debts, Power struggles | 2 Comments

Margaret and Her Poor Manners

Posted on May 19, 2013 by pw134848

Ah Margaret, the poor and oppressed daughter of Overreach who desires freedom and love. The perfect daughter who only wishes for good and justice and blah blah blah blah. Bah Margaret is an ungrateful girl who lusts after some idiot young noble that was foolish enough to lose standing and title. I mean look! Overreach worked long and hard making his fortune and provides everything for her! He gives her lovely gowns, brilliant jewelry, and even gives her the opportunity to marry a noble lord! How does she repay him? By marrying that little twat of a noble called Allworth and ruins him mentally. Some daughter she is.

Would she rather be toiling on a farm working her hands to the bone? Would she rather sell herself on the street to random men to make ends meet? Would she rather be sold off to slavery and work for some stranger? Frankly I think she has it quite good compared to other young women around her age. She lives in a nice house and has all manners of things available to her. The least she could do was respect her father and marry Lovell! I mean she doesn’t have to worry about starving on the streets! Or having to endure rape and torture by bandits that roam the countryside. No need to care about clothing during those cold, bitter winter months. So Margaret isn’t this oppressed poor girl that she’s made out to be. No she’s just a spoiled little brat that couldn’t see what she had and decided to destroy her father. Some daughter she turned out to be!

 

(Just wanted to play the other side.)

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

Greed Doesn’t Pay

Posted on May 15, 2013 by jl112805

As we have recently seen in The Changeling, villainous greed is not a successful route to obtain your goals.  The same theme is reinforced here by Sir Giles Overreach in A New Way to Pay Old Debts.  Massinger’s Overreach makes it known his true colors of extortion and abuse of power; “‘Twas for these good ends/ I made him a justice. He that bribes his belly/ Is certain to command his soul” (2.1.8–10).  Going as low as helping his nephew Wellborn relieve himself of all his worth.  Overreach goes on to reveal pride that he “value not an atom” of the religious right and wrong, (2.1.26).  He creates devious plans to obtain the wealth of those around him concerned only with his position in the end.  However, just like Beatrice, all his scheming is for naught.  Overreach’s own greed becomes his downfall as he loses to the very people, good people, he planned to sabotage.

Happily, we end the semester with a comedy.  One with a valuable lesson.  Be weary of the over ambitious ones surrounding you, there is a fine line between ambition and greed.  Greedy people will walk all over you if allowed and we should all be aware of them.  I am glad to end with a play that didn’t require anyone’s tongue being cut out or children threatened to prove a point.  Somehow, this 400 year old play says a lot for what a group of good people can do regardless of the position held by the opposition.  Without becoming political, it amazes me how this play points out that if one greedy tyrant is stopped, many other lives can flourish.

Posted in A New Way to Pay Old Debts, Comedy, Stylistic qualities | 2 Comments

Overreach’s Honesty versus Allworth’s Poetry

Posted on May 15, 2013 by J Gritz

In A New Way to Pay Old Debts, two characters speak with a similar grandeur, yet with different connotations. One character speaks with confidence and snobbery, while the other lacks such confidence and substitutes it with poetic words. Sir Giles Overreach is pompous, ruthless and honest. He speaks in a shameless way as if he lacks a conscience. “Nay, when my ears are pierced with widows’ cries/ and undone orphans wash with tears my threshold/…Makes me insensible of remorse, or pity/ Or the least sting of conscience,” responds Overreach when questioned whether he is affected by his sinister actions (4.1.125-130). It is a poetic speech, filled with statements of arrogance, but concealed by the grandeur of his words. Each of his speeches have these certain points that give such great insight into the mind of Overreach with statements, such as “I am marble” (4.1.133), or when speaking to Lord Lovell about Lovell’s nobility, “the immaculate whiteness of your fame/ Nor your unquestioned integrity…” (4.1.94-95). His speeches are astounding because they exude so much confidence and are so beautifully worded that it takes a few readings to realize that what Overreach is actually saying is completely awful and brutal.

On the other hand, Tom Allworth lacks that confidence, which was on display during his conversation with Lovell in scene 3.1. Allworth feels that he would be unable to woo his love Margaret if Lovell would ever decide to take up Margaret’s father Sir Overreach’s offer to marry her. Allworth speaks with a desperation, yet the choice of words that he uses is mature and poetic, concealing his insecurities of being a young man without much to offer Margaret. Allworth describes Margaret with illustrations of her beauty, such as “Though mounted high, commanding all beneath it/ And rammed with bullets of her sparkling eyes…” (3.1.62-63), and also “But when the well-tuned accents of her tongue/ Make music to you…” (3.1.66-67). He is trying hard to sound wise beyond his years, making it difficult to read into what he is saying. His lack of confidence is masked by the poetic speech, which emits a sense of overreaching, while the character Overreach does not seem to try so hard with brutal words that illustrate how he truly feels. It is contrasting feature that I found interesting in both characters.

Posted in A New Way to Pay Old Debts, Stylistic qualities | 1 Comment