For Act 3, I would like us all to do two things. I want you to find an example of a word or group of words that confused you, and that you needed to rely on the notes for understanding. Then, I want you to find another example of something that confused you in this act, and you had to rely on something other than the notes for an explanation. What did you rely on? (dictionary, context clues, intuition, etc.).
Why was it important for you to understand the meanings behind these two examples you have given us, and what was the experience of figuring out Shakespearean language on your own like, without the help of the annotations?
For the word/words you had to understand on your own, I’d like you to do a close reading of the passage they occur in. As you are trying to analyze the passage, think about and reflect on how understanding the meaning or idea of these words actually enables you to analyze the text better. How does the passage you are close reading relate to one or more of the themes we discussed in class (betrayal, thirst for power and control, sibling relationships and rivalries, love…)?
Remember to note down the location of any examples you use from the text, for example (3.1.25-30).
In act 3, scene 1 I had to rely on the notes to understand in particular was when it says, ” And put it to the foil.” (3.1.56) which meant to defeat and overthrow it and I was surprised to see that foil was a weapon. Without the notes I would not be able to figure this out. Another example would be when Ferdinand says, ” A thousand thousand.” (3.1.110) This line got me very confused, at first, I thought I understood from the notes, but I kept second guessing myself. It was just not making sense to me. I had to rely on the context clues, and I had to go back and read the passage over again. I understood that it meant 1000 times a thousand which equals a million and using the context clues I understood why it was uses as a farewell message.
It was important for me to understand the meaning behind these words because I feel that if I was confused or just skipped over it, I would get the wrong meaning and continue having the wrong understanding of the act. My experience of understanding Shakespeare on my own was not good, it made me thankful that we speak the way we speak now because I would honestly have to carry a dictionary around. It was not very difficult given the resources we have but it was very important that I understood so I could keep moving on to the next passage.
For the last part of this prompt, I did a close reading on lines 96-110 and I used that context to help me understand what was meant by line 110. After I understood the meaning, I read that part again and I then understood that it was talking about love and relationships. Line 110 translates to a million farewells which implied that the whole conversation between Miranda and Ferdinand was love and the fact that they were trying to understand their relationship
I didn’t mention these group of words in my blog post, but I also had to look at the notes for clarification on what “foil” and “a thousand thousand” mean. Sometimes relying on notes and revisiting the passage are crucial for understanding. Also, I think that it’s clever that a thousand thousand means a million farewells.
I completely agree that Shakespeare’s language is difficult to grasp and understand, and I used a similar method of close reading and contextual clues. It is especially important to evaluate the relationships and interactions between two characters, like you did with Miranda and Ferdinand, to see how they contribute to the text’s evolving themes.
Hi Fatima, these really are some very confusing parts. I agree with you, the easiest would be to skip over whatever word/sentence is not clear but important details for the bigger picture could be left out. Reading Shakespeare definitely requires a lot of focus and analyzing of details and it would be so exhausting if we would have to talk today in such a language.
Miranda and Ferdinand’s love story part was very interesting to me but also a little confusing as it gave me a hard time deciding the theme but also understanding the meaning behind the words.
I find your method very useful as you read what you knew first to contextualize the words you did not know. Shakespeare does have a way of giving deep meaning to simple words. The examples you present really illustrate it. As Miranda and Ferdinand were trying to understand their relationship, we too, are trying to understand the meaning behind these words.
One word that I had to refer to the notes for further clarity is the use of the word “infected” when he is describing Ferdinand’s relationship to Miranda (3.1. 38). I was confused about the use of “infected” because contemporarily, that word is used to describe malaise caused by a contagious illness. Another word that I had looked at the notes–and Google–to understand is “Harpy” (3.3. 69). Before looking up the definition, I gathered based on context clues that a Harpy must be an entity that sentences sinners to hell. However, I was wondering why Prospero chooses to threaten the men with this specific creature that from my understanding is non-biblical.
I thought that it would be important to figure out what Prospero meant by Ferdinand being “infected” because I wanted more insight into Prospero’s developing thoughts on Ferdinand and Miranda’s relationship. When Prospero first got to know Ferdinand, he told him that he would be a slave on the island. Therefore, Prospero initially antagonized Ferdinand and Miranda’s relationship. In Act 3, however, Ferdinand and Miranda get married with Prospero watching on the side. Now knowing what I know from the notes, Prospero’s remark about Ferdinand being “infected” is really a means of saying that Ferdinand is sick with love. The notes’ explanation of the word “infected” completely shifted my perspective of this passage, because I had originally thought that Prospero was still slightly antagonizing their relationship.
Furthermore, figuring out what Harpy meant was valuable for me because I was curious about whether the mention of it is symbolically tied to the play. When I searched up what a Harpy is on Google, I found that it is a Greek mythological half-bird half-human that personifies storm winds. I think that Prospero’s decision to scare the men who betrayed him with a Harpy is quite fitting, considering that Prospero’s storm is what ultimately led to the shipwreck. Prospero’s use of the Harpy to scare those who betrayed him hints at a thirst for control, echoing the storm that initially led to the shipwreck. Therefore, I predict that storms will continue to be prevalent symbol for power hunger throughout The Tempest.
I completely agree with you that it’s important to comprehend the meaning of Shakespearean language since it takes you to a bygone era with its depth and emotional richness.
Your analysis is very deep and meaningful. It has helped me to further understand the two terms you have chosen. As you have mentioned, “infected” may not be a word with a positive connotation in modern days but in this instance, it was used perfectly. Perhaps it is to elude to the fact that love can be good and bad given certain situations.
Words like ” thou mayst brain him” (3.2.97) in Act 3 of Tempest confused me because, although it was initially intended to indicate “smash in his skull,” but I think it actually meant “planner or leader” which actually didn’t make any sense because the whole act was not connecting together with my thought until I learned the real meaning behind it, Act 3’s usage of the stereotype “He that dies pays all debts” (3.2.143), which I felt to be literary, was the other passage that confused me. To figure out the true meaning of this term, I have to rely on Quizlet.
I think it was important for me to understand the meaning behind these examples because they play a significant role in the play in regard to understanding but according to language difference, it meant something else to me. To be honest, it was difficult for me to understand Shakespearean language on my own. I’m taking some time to get adjusted to the old terms and expressions. But I thought it was fascinating since it was like cracking a code and discovering gems in the language!
The part where I did the close reading was between (3.2. 97-143) as I was a little lost in it where, I had to go over them multiple times to acknowledge what was happening in it, as they were actually talking about killing Prospero and taking away his power as he was the powerful man and had everyone as his slaves but the common thing between him and his power was his books as that book holds his power/ magic, where I thought they were only talking about how to take away things by being greedy because the land belongs to Caliban and he wants it back. The passage relates to themes such as power and mistreatment.
I experienced a similar confusion over the words you used in your response; I also thought they meant something else, but they turned out to be something completely different. I also believe that this particular section was vital to comprehend because it represents a turning point and an important shift of the characters. The characters are revealing more about themselves, which is important to grasp the play’s themes.
I completely agree with you as the play goes on it gets very difficult to understand the theme. The characters are expressing themselves more and more but it can get very difficult with the words and how the words get more difficult as we move on.
I agree that a lot of Act 3 Scene 2 was confusing and I had to re-read parts to understand it. I think part of it was intentionally meant to be confusing and irrational because the 3 men, Caliban, Stephano, and Trinculo were under the influence in this scene. Caliban’s speech is influenced by his emotions of anger and hatred toward Prospero while he is drunk which explains why it is harsh and sometimes unsensible.
I relied on notes for understanding many words among which was the word mistress. It doesn’t have the meaning we would think of today, instead is the opposite: “ woman that I love.”
It was important to understand this to better understand how is Ferdinand talking to Miranda. (3.1. 40-45)
Other confusing words: Thou liest- you lie/ you are a liar. I relied on the modern version of the text to understand this. It was important to understand what Ariel was saying in Trinculo’s voice when Caliban was explaining what Prospero did to him. Because of his words, which he used Trinculo’s voice for, Stephano beat up Trinculo. Although it’s not fair he got beat up, it was the kinda funny part. Throughout 3.2
It’s important to understand the meanings of individual words to better understand the text and what is happening. To understand the characters better. Without understanding some words or even sentences in some instances, it could be really easy to interpret what was Sheakspire saying in the wrong way. When it comes to my understanding, language is already very difficult to interpret and without the notes, it would be even harder, maybe impossible. The modern version was very helpful too.
It’s not in the notes so at first when reading the original text, when Caliban was talking about Prospero he said how he: “by his cunning hunt cheated him off the island.” (3.2.45-50) This sounded like he was cursing him and saying something bad, but it meant he used his magic to take the island from him. It’s important to understand it because later on Caliban talks about Prospero’s magic again and how without his books he would have no power, no magic. We see through these situations that he is kind of envious of Prospero having this power and influence over the island. He believes if he had no magic they would be equal.
The part where Caliban convinces Stephano to kill Prospero can be connected to betrayal. (3.2) Caliban felt betrayed by Prospero taking the island after he was the one to show him around. So he wants him to lose what he has, as revenge. He is a servant anyway, but he’d want to be Stephano’s servant rather if that would harm Prospero. Also, it’s connected to the thirst for power and control because Stephano likes the idea and is easily convinced that he could be the leader of the island and have his servants, Caliban and Trinculo. Although he is forgetting he is Alonso’s servant. But he thinks he could accomplish this. He even believes he could have Miranda as a Queen and he could be the King. It seems like most of the characters would betray anyone for their own good, and could also be easily influenced by others, with not much thinking about it.
I also thought that the word mistress is disrespectful to call somebody that you love, but Shakespeare had used this word use before refer to a Lady, somebody that has a high social status. I learned this a long time ago, when I read Macbeth.
What do you think Prospero’s magic books could represent outside of the play? As you explain, they are the source of his power, and, at the end of the play, when he gives up his powers, he lets go of his books. If we think of him as the outsider, coming to this island and taking control of it (using his knowledge of magic), taking it away from the native inhabitants of the island, would we be able to read the play as a commentary on colonialism?
The opening of Act 3 Scene 1 was confusing to me. Ferdinand starts saying “There be some sports are painful, and their labor delight in them (sets) off” (3,1, 1-2). I understood that at the beginning he said sports are painful because as an athlete you must push your body to go beyond the expectations, so you can stand out and perform professionally, this process requires sacrifice and devotion. But the part that confused me was “their labor delight in them sets off” (3,1, 1-2). So, I went to the notes to find the meaning and thankfully it was there. This phrase refers that every sacrifice has a reward, which is satisfying for the one who performed. And immediately came to mind the phrase “No pain, no gain”. So, I got an idea where this scene where going.
Immediately, I remembered that at the end Act 1, Scene 2 Ferdinand got into a confrontation with Prospero, so I assume that Prospero slaved or put him to do some kind of hard job to gain his approval, and when Ferdinand expressed that he delights on it no matter how hard it is, I assumed that he is willing to do whatever Prospero asks him to do, just because he loves Miranda so much. As, I continue reading, my assumptions proved me right, Ferdinand was willing to do the hardest job in the island just to married Miranda and be with her forever.
In Scene 3, Alonzo was describing creatures that exist in different parts of their world and he said, “Who would believe that there were mountaineers Dewlapped like bulls, whose throats had hanging at ’em Wallets of flesh?” (3,3, 58-61). I got confused by the words “wallet of flesh”, so at first, I thought that the mountaineers had some kind of pockets in their body, but on the notes, it says that it is a protuberance, so I got more confused. I google a modern version of the play and find out that he meant that this people have skin hanging from their throat as the cattle do.
For me it is very important to understand the words, first because I want to learn as much English as I can, second, I want to be prepared for my assignments. First, I like to read the acts without using the notes and highlight the words that I don’t understand, I also do annotation on the sides, this could be something that I intuit that is going on, or something related to the theme or something that I wonder. Then I read it again but this time using the notes, this helps me to see if my assumptions where right or wrong, it also could change my persecution of the play or ensure the idea that I had in mind. At last, if there is some part that I don’t get it at all, I use a modern version of the play to gain a better understanding of it.
Hi Cindy, that’s a good way of interpreting the text, I do the same. When you read the original first you can analyze better and see how you understand the text on your own, then use the notes and modern text where necessary. I find it very helpful because in many situations I would have a wrong impression of what’s going on without the explanation of text.
I agree with your point that Stephanie likes the idea and was easily convinced in killing Prospero. Everyone is trying to kill one another rather than trying to get off the island. Everyone’s fixation on power and control add to the tension on the island and I wonder what will happen when they all meet.
During Act 3 Scene 2, there were a few words on which I relied on the notes to fully comprehend the meaning of the line. When Caliban discusses killing Prospero, he says, “Which, when he has a house, he’ll deck withal” (3.2.106). This statement, in particular, confused me because he was discussing the brutal ways he would kill Prospero throughout the paragraph, and having this sentence directly after was completely different, leading to confusion. According to the notes, “he’ll deck withal” meant “he’ll adorn his house.” In this case, Caliban was referring to Prospero’s brave utensil , his furniture, with which he would adorn his house once he had the opportunity to acquire one, and tells them to burn everything he owned except his magic books. I found it important to understand this phrase in particular because in this scene we see a plot twist and a rising point in the play, which I believe is necessary to understand the entire plot that these characters plan to figure out what might happen next.
Another example of a phrase that I had to figure out using context clues and intuition was when Trinculo says, “I am in case to justle a constable” (3.2.27–28). In this instance, I considered a trait that Trinculo is asserting about himself, and just before this, Caliban uses the word valiant, which means to be determined and have courage. As a result, Trinculo insisted that he was a courageous man and had the quality of being valiant. In general, understanding Shakespeare’s language is difficult and requires a lot of work if annotations are not provided. Sometimes prior lines or lines after can help to understand the context, but otherwise notes or having a modern version by side helps far more.
In conclusion, these words helped me understand the theme of rivalries and the desire for power, as Trinculo states how much more courageous he is than Prospero, which has an influence on Caliban as well. Caliban’s revolt against Prospero and plan to kill him further initiates these themes further.
I agree I also had a tough time understanding your 2nd example. I had to rely on context clues to understand what it meant. Yes understanding these words also cleared out the theme of the passage. This is another reason why it is important to understand the English you read with these plays.
To add to your understanding of Trinculo’s line “I am in case to hustle a constable” and its importance to one of the themes of the Tempest of power and control, Trinculo is trying to prove himself to be the opposite of Caliban. Trinculo speaks of himself in comparison to Caliban, as in the line before he says “Thou liest, most ignorant monster” then he speaks of how just and courageous he is. Trinculo thinks of himself as superior and above Caliban and praises himself for it.
Act 3 Scene 1 of “The Tempest” by Shakespeare begins with Ferdinand working hard for Prospero as Miranda watches. Ferdinand is currently tasked to carry a large number of logs as he seems to complain about his workload, which he calls a “mean task” (3.1.92). However, he is much more willing to do his labor as he has Miranda watching him in sympathy the entire time, pleading with Ferdinand to rest. Miranda even goes as far as to tell Ferdinand to sit down, as she would happily take over the carrying logs for him. The scene creates a strong bonding moment for the two, the situation escalates heavily into the two boldly complimenting one another, creating a strong intimate, and emotional tension. Ferdinand, amid everything, asks Miranda her name, to which she replies “Miranda.—O my father, I have broke your hest to say so!” (3.1.93) I was particularly confused about the word hest, and why it seems as if Miranda feels regretful to her father for stating her name. I then used the context of the situation along with my intuition to realize that Prospero had commanded Miranda not to give her name to his servant. This led to the conclusion that the meaning of hest was “trust”. This leads to the two declaring their love for one another, along with Miranda suggesting marriage, which Ferdinand agrees to instantly. However, as the scene ends, Ferdinand bids farewell to Miranda by saying” A thousand thousand” (3.1.97) which confused but also intrigued me. I inferred that it was a way to say goodbye but I could not understand how. This is how the notes helped me further understand Shakespearean language as they showed me the meaning was “a million (farewells)”
I definitely agree with how Ferdinand and Miranda leave off on a confusing note. At the beginning of the act they are profusely confessing their love for one another but then Ferdinand bids her farewell after all of that.
Hi Timothy, I had similar thoughts about the interaction between Ferdinand and Miranda. I also had some confusion on the word “hest” and I did not pick up on the context clues easily. I think it was an important word to analyze as it shows how serious their relationship is with each other.
Example #1: 3.2.108-109
“He himself / Calls her a nonpareil.”
Example #2: 3.3.72-73
“And what is in ‘t, the never-surfeited sea / Hath caused to belchup you”
The first example (3.2.108-109) confused me with the usage of the word “nonpareil” (one without equal; no rival). Despite this being a word still used today, I wasn’t familiar with it and had to consult the notes. I felt this word was important to understand since it was a description of what Prospero thinks of his daughter Miranda, stemming from Caliban’s perspective. It is an interesting look into the outsider’s view of their relationship. The fact that Caliban says “And that most deeply to consider” (3.2.107) is Miranda’s beauty, and that Prospero himself says “she has no rival”, speaks to how deeply Prospero’s love runs for her in Caliban’s eyes. I previously mentioned in Blog Post #1 that I believe that while Prospero may love his daughter, he is as manipulative of her for his own gain as anyone else on the island. Thus, not only is Caliban most likely wrong in his view, but I believe that from an outsider’s point of view, Prospero presents himself as a simple character. It may be that Prospero is just truly that good at playing the role of the caring and trustworthy father with those around him, which is why Miranda believes him so easily. Additionally, it could mean that his power doesn’t only come from magic but from his intelligence (despite Caliban’s insistence that Stephano and Trinculo must destroy the magic books before they kill Prospero). On the other hand, Caliban could just be ignorant and gullible, as he is doing the same with Stephano and Trinculo as he did with Prospero when he first arrived on the island with Miranda. Thus, it is also possible that Caliban and Miranda are both naive, especially to Prospero’s true intentions. Overall, looking closer into the usage of “nonpareil” reveals the familial love that is intertwined with the power dynamics of the story when it comes to Prospero and Miranda.
In the second example (3.3.72-73) on the other hand, Ariel uses the phrase “never-surfeited” to describe the sea that spits Alonso and all his men up on this island. Since the notes did not give me the meaning of this, I consulted a website called “Shakespeare’s Words” which stated the definition as “never filled to excess”. This phrase was important to understand as the passage has Ariel telling the men they’re sinners who will soon answer for their crimes against Prospero and Miranda. The usage of “never-surfeited” points to the fact that Ariel wanted to convey to the men that they are so horrible that even the sea that can hold so much and “never be filled to excess” wanted them out. Although, it is interesting that he uses “destiny” as the reason why they are on the island, and that he is carrying out “Fate’s” orders since Prospero is Ariel’s master. Thus, it points to the issue that all of this is happening because of Prospero, not because true fate is carrying out justice on these men, which again brings us back to Prospero’s manipulation and power.
Reading Shakespearean language is difficult for me with specific words and phrases here and there. When figuring out the language on my own, I can understand the general story going on, but I do believe that using notes and other sources helps me better understand the deeper meaning of the characters, words, and themes.
Hi Jennifer, I too struggled with the word nonpareli. I was confused as to why Caliban even brought Miranda up the way he did. It made me so uncomfortable, especially knowing he tried to take advantage of her and now she is being viewed as an end goal to their plan.
In Act 3 Scene 2, I had to re-read a couple times to understand what was going on and that the three of them, Caliban Stephano and Trinculo. The summary on page 98 also helped me understand what was going on. In Act 3 Scene 2, line 23, Stephano refers to Caliban as a “Mooncalf” which while reading I struggled to understand the meaning of. However, in the same scene, line 27 Trinculo calls Caliban “most ignorant monster” and line 36 “That a monster should be such a natural!”. In the notes page 100 “natural” is explained to mean idiot, so I came to the conclusion that the word Mooncalf also meant someone stupid. In this scene it is clear to see that even though Stephano and Trinculo don’t agree on trusting Caliban, they both see him as someone stupid and inferior to them that they can take advantage of. Stephano and Trinculo excuse their ill treatment of Caliban by reiterating that he is “ignorant” and dumb, and since they are smarter than him they feel entitled to rule over him, relating to the theme of control and power.
Additionally I have trouble understanding the discourse between Sebastian, Alonzo, and Gonzalo In Act 3, Scene 3, lines 53-69. In line 63, Gonzolo says “whose heads stood in their breasts” which is clarified in the notes with an image of it on page 104, however I do not understand the significance of it. I also did not understand the meaning of line 58, “mountaineers Dewlapped like bulls whos throats had hanging at em” which the notes on page 12 defined as mountain people with flaps of skin under their necks. Possibly, the sight of the dancing shapes was just as odd to the three men as disfigured humans would be. Perhaps the description of the new sights resembles how the explorers of Shakespear’s time perceived how people lived on the land they “discovered”. Gonzolo in line Act 3, Scene 3 line 62 states that these odd things they would not believe had existed as kids as things “Which now we find”. It is obvious to the readers that these sights don’t actually exist but might represent how Europeans felt about the new things they discovered when exploring seas.
Hi Jasmine, you did a great job analyzing and using context clues to figure out what mooncalf meant and connecting it to the theme of power. I didn’t understand how the three of them formed an allience when Stephano and Trinculo clearly thought poorly of Caliban at first, but you slowly see Stephano defend Caliban and take his side. I think it all ties into them being power hungry.
Hi Jasmine, the heads on chest image was disturbing, and the addition of that is confusing in the text. Shakespeare could have done without it.
The first term that confused me was “maze,” so I looked up its explanation in the notes and it’s “ an intricate set of interconnecting paths that lead confusingly to (and away from) a center” (3.3. 1-3)
I was also confused by the word “mutineer,” (3.2.36-40) which I couldn’t find in the notes. When I looked up its definition, I saw that it describes a person who openly resists the authority of a higher authority or governing body, which shows the complexity of power conflicts and relationships in a variety of situations. I relied on a dictionary to find this definition.
For me, it was important to understand these words as they were important to understanding the sentence’s whole meaning. Furthermore, my interest in picking up new words and increasing my vocabulary encouraged me to study their definitions in more depth, which improved my language abilities as well as my understanding. This learning process not only helps me understand better, but it also gains more knowledge.
Independently getting through Shakespeare’s language was an important learning opportunity for me since it forced me to go outside my comfort zone—that is, depending just on notes—and encouraged me to do quite a bit of research. Shakespeare’s language became more clear because of this research, which also focused on his particular writing style.
Understanding the word’s meaning helped me to analyze the whole passage.Looking more closely at the part where the word “mutineer,” was used, I saw that Stephano was using it to scare Trinculo since he didn’t seem to be listening . This understanding of the word’s meaning as a somebody who opposes authority revealed the context of Stephano’s threat, which was an attempt to establish his power.The analysis helped me understand the characters’ relationships and the importance of their interactions within the story. It also showed me how important it is to understand specific words in order to understand a text’s larger context. Since Stephano was using his position of authority and power to control Trinculo, the part of the book I read had a strong connection to the theme of a thirst for power and control.
Hi Abdoulaye, I completely agree with your insight into why it’s important to understand Shakespeare’s language. Although I do like researching from time to time, it’s not always ideal to do so while reading. I personally like to read things in one go and be able to understand it clearly then. With texts such as “The Tempest”, which are written in an older version of English, it makes it that much harder to understand an already heavily profound story. Research into the language takes time, but is worth it to get a better comprehension of the themes and deeper meanings Shakespeare wants to convey.
One scene that confused me takes place in act 3 scene 2. We see Caliban trying to form an alliance with Stephano. In the midst of trying to accomplish this, Trinculo is also there laughing and making fun of Caliban which upsets him very much to the point that he asks Stephano to make Trinculo stop. During Caliban’s story, Trinculo is being told to shut up and keep his distance because they think Trinculo is calling Caliban a liar. Stephano even goes as far as beating Trinculo “Do I so? Take thou that. (beats TRINCULO) As you like this, give me the lie another time” (3.2.83-84). Which is where my confusion came into play because I too believed Trinculo did nothing. However, Ariel being there made all the sense in the world. I couldn’t figure out why he was in the scene at all and after using context clues, I figured out that Ariel was the reason they believed Trinculo called Caliban’s story a lie.
One example of a word that I had trouble understanding was the drollery in act 3 scene 3 line 26. After the stranger shapes danced around and brought the men things, they couldn’t believe their eyes. The text is spoken by Sebastian and it says “A living drollery! Now I will believe That there are unicorns, that in Arabia There is one tree, the phoenix’ throne, one phoenix At this hour reigning there.” (3.3.26-29). I thought drollery meant dream or fantasy because he spoke of unicorns and phoenixes, however, I was wrong. The proper meaning of the word is comic play or a puppet show, some kind of entertainment which still makes sense to the text. It was important to understand the two examples because both examples contributed to what was happening in the scene. They contributed to my comprehension of what was going on. As far as a theme being shown in these examples, I don’t think any of them present themselves here
Hi Angelica, I also struggled with the same lines by Sebastian. I don’t think context clues helped much here either, because I assumed Sebastian could be referring to the event as anything when he used the word dollery. I agree that in those lines there is not much contributing to the theme, as I found Ariel’s words more meaningful towards a theme of revenge/sibling rivalry.
Hi Angelica, the Ariel scene also frustrated me because she was manipulating the characters but at least Stephano apologized after beating Trinculo.
From the beginning of the reading, I had to rely on the notes. Even the words that I thought I knew had different meanings. The language is really hard to understand. One of the lines that I was confused about and had looked at the notes and didn’t understand until looking at the notes was from Act 3, scene 3, Aonso’s line 115 to 120 “Oh, it is monstrous, monstrous. Methought the billows spoke and told me of it, The winds did sing it to me, and the thunder, That deep and dreadful organ pipe, pronounced The name of Prosper. It did bass my trespass. Therefore, my son i’ th’ ooze is bedded, and I’ll seek him deeper than e’er plummet sounded And with him there lie mudded.” In this line, Alonso is expressing his feelings about what he believes happened to his son Ferdinand during the storm at sea. He is using the word methought to describe how he hears the voice and sound, as it’s said on the note. Alonso describes the harpy’s speech as having come to his ears like the sounds of waves, wind, and thunder. When I first read the word, I thought this was the new character’s name.
In Act 3, the word “prithee” was used a few times. And there were no notes for this word. Example In Act 3, scene 1, Caliban says, “I prithee, let me bring thee where crabs grow, And I with my long nails, will dig thee pig-nuts; Show thee a jay’s nest, and instruct thee how To snare the nimble marmoset. I’ll bring thee To clustering filberts, and sometimes I’ll get thee Young scamels from the rock.” in these lines Caliban’s invitation to show Trinculo a range of items in the open air. In those lines, the word prithee counts, like please, could. In Act 3, scene 2, line 36, Calbina says, “Lo, lo again! Bite him to death, I prithee.” In this line, the word “I prithee” sounds like please. Bite him to death, please. To know the real meaning of this word, I had to google the word. The first thing I did was translate the word into Uzbek. Google Translate didn’t translate the word. So I have to rely on Google, and it’s kind of making sense.
Hello Umida,
I totally understand your struggle to understand Shakespeare’s style, as it has its own vibe that can be difficult to understand at first.
It’s great to see that you’re using your notes and other resources to further understand what’s happening in the play.
Interpreting Shakespeare on my own, without relying on the notes it is almost difficult to understand what the individual characters are trying to say and how the plot develops. Since I am not a native English speaker, and since Shakespearean English is different from modern English, I can only understand some words sporadically without the notes, but not the complete sentences.
3.1.4-7 The original sentence is “ This my mean task Would be as heavy to me as odious, but The mistress which I serve quickens what’s dead And makes my labors pleasures.” According to the notes, it means there is a type of humble work that is endured with an extraordinary spirit of perseverance. The most menial tasks often point towards the loftiest goals. Such servile duties should be arduous and distasteful to me, yet serving the lady I do, I find myself invigorated, feeling that the labor is instead a pleasure. After reading the notes, I can understand how Ferdinand feel during doing the hard job. Although all this physical labor was unfamiliar and tough for him, it was all worth it for Miranda, even delightful. His deep love for Miranda is evident in his lines and reflects the character’s personal growth.
3.3.106-115 I can hardly understand the original sentence “ Their several kinds have done”. According to the notes, it means they act according to their nature. And after reading the Chinese version that I realized it probably express all magical creatures have succeed in their mission. It is important for me to understand the words because this narration describes the inner thoughts of Prospero after Ariel intervenes in disguise after the feast. By looking up the words in notes, I was able to know that Prospero appreciated Ariel’s successful intervention in the banquet. For him, who had a desire to be in control, Ariel’s performance obeyed his orders without imperfection, and even the island’s pixies played their part, which gave him a great deal of satisfaction. At the same time, his confidence in the power of his own magic can be seen, as it frightens his enemies through its power, thus bringing them under his control.This demonstrates Prospero’s desire for power and is one of the themes of the essay that Shakespeare is trying to convey.
I can relate with you An. Shakespeare is challenging for student like us, and we have to go beyond the annotations to get a better understanding of the play and be able to analyze it.
It’s very understandable that trying to read Shakespeare as a non-native speaker can be hard. But your insights into Ferdinand’s feelings and Prospero’s interactions with magic are great and add depth to the understanding of the characters and themes.
In the beginning of Act 3, during Ferdinand and Miranda’s conversation, I struggled with a few words from Miranda. Those words are found in the quote “no woman’s face remember—Save, from my glass, mine own. Nor have I seen More that I may call men than you, good friend, And my dear father. How features are abroad I am skill-less of, but, by my modesty, The jewel in my dower, I would not wish Any companion in the world but you” (3.1.49-55). I struggled with words such as “glass,” “skill-less,” and “dower.” I understood the dialogue before pretty well, so I had a good understanding of what was being said, especially when she stated the word “modesty.” After referring to the modern text, it made a lot more sense that “glass” meant mirror, and “skill-less” meaning having no idea. I could not directly translate “dower” to the modern text, but I assumed it was a phrase referring to her modesty. Although I understood what was going on without these words, I still found it helpful to analyze them. By doing so I gained a better understanding of Miranda’s feelings about herself and towards Ferdinand as they announced their love for each other.
I oftentimes read the modern text regardless after the original to understand Shakespearean language, but an example of really challenging groups of words to me was when Ariel spoke to Alonso, Antonio, and Sebastian. Lines such as “Of whom your swords are tempered may as well Wound the loud winds or with bemocked-at stabs Kill the still-closing waters as diminish One dowl that’s in my plume” (3.3.68-71) and “They have bereft, and do pronounce by me Lingering perdition, worse than any death” (3.3.82-83) in particular were some that I struggled with. I relied on the dictionary, as well as context clues to understand the meaning of these words. For the first group of lines I mentioned by Ariel, I used context clues to understand the gist of it. I could see that the men drew their swords, and Ariel was calling their swords useless, but I was still stumped on words like “dowl” and “plume.” I used definitions and context clues from Ariel’s announced entrance (“flaps his wings”) to determine that these words were referring to Ariel’s features as a bird-like creature. For the word “perdition,” I also looked up the definition to conclude it meant “eternal punishment.” After closely analyzing the long monologue, it helped me better understand what Ariel was saying to the men. This passage relates to the theme of sibling rivalries and revenge. Ariel appears to haunt and threaten the men, on behalf of Prospero.
The word jocund was one that I wasn’t familiar with prior to reading, but when it appeared in Act 3, scene 2, line 129, I used the context of the scene to understand that it was in a happy tone. Caliban is cheerful that Stefano is going to get rid of Prospero. They are singing in the scene and planning their attack. The close reading gave me a better look at the hatred for Prospero because they were joyful (which could be a world that can replace Jocund) about going to get rid of him.
In Act 3, the word murrain (3.2. line 87) is used when Trinculo is contesting Stephano. The context of this did not help because I still don’t understand in this scene when we see Ariel causing problems between Caliban, Stefano, and Trinculo, trying to get them to turn on each other. I had to use a dictionary to find out the meaning, but murrain means infectious disease. Now with the meaning, I can see that Trinculo is saying that Stephano’s drinking has negative effects on his reasoning. The closer reading showed me the control Prospero has over Ariel, which is clear when he uses Ariel to do all the bidding while he watches from above- invisible.
It is important to understand the meanings of these words because it is clear to see how words can be up to interpretation, and they can open new ways of thinking or strengthen what we already know. To figure out the Shakespearean language on my own, I had to re-read the text a few times and use the audiobook to give me a better representation of what was going on. The audiobook gives me a tone of voice so that I am better able to distinguish phrases.
Hello Jeanice!
The word “jocund” was quite confusing to me as well, and it’s great to read someone else’s perspective on it. It’s always worth it to go above and beyond to understand the meaning of words as it helps you picture what’s happening better.
An example of a group of words that confused me in Act 3 would be ‘Where man doth not inhabit, you ‘mongst men Being most unfit to live. I have made you mad; And even with such-like valor, men hang and drown”(3.1.74-76). I did not understand what Ariel was saying to the men because of the “such-like valor” until I referred to the notes. She essentially told them they do not deserve to live and she has driven them mad to the point of desperation. It was important for me to understand this because Ariel is telling them it is their fault they are in such a situation on the island. Due to their betrayal of Prospero and greed for power, they going to suffer on the island amongst themselves.
Another example of a group of words that confused me in Act 3 would be “I am right glad that he’s so out of hope. Do not, for one repulse, forgo the purpose That you resolved t’ effect.’” (3.3.12-15). I had to rely on the dictionary to understand what Antonio was saying to Sebastian. I know the words individual definition but together it did not make sense. Words such as repulse, forgo, and resolved even when I did look at the notes. It is important for me to understand the meaning of this quote because it contributes to the thirst for power and control as well as sibling relationships and rivalries. Antonio is still encouraging Sebastian to kill his brother for the place of power just like he did to Prospero. Something I wonder is why Antonio is encouraging Sebastian to kill his brother. Does he gain something from this? Antonio showed that he had a strategic and manipulative way of doing things when he managed to overthrow his brother from dukedom. He is also trying to point out to Sebastian that he has a higher chance of succeeding because Alonso is “so out of hope” in finding his son, heir to the position of power Sebastian would get if he killed his brother.
I agree with your second example’s analysis Jennisa. I’ve also been wondering exactly why is it that Antonio wants to encourage Sebastian to kill his brother. It is obvious that it would benefit Sebastian to kill his brother as Antonio betrayed his own, but it’s not clear what would come of it for Antonio. It plays right into the “thirst for power and control” and “sibling relationships and rivalries” themes as you noted. This is why I believe that it’s not just as simple as Antonio has a better life after taking Prospero’s duke position, and now he is trying to make Sebastian do the same because he believes it will better his life too. There must be a reason he’s manipulating Sebastian to do this, and I’m interested in finding out why.
In Act 3 of The Tempest, a particular sentence grabbed my attention and made me interested in learning more about the meaning behind it. In Act 3, Scene 1, when Ferdinand is carrying logs, Miranda offers to help him, however, he responds by saying: “I had rather crack my sinews,” (3.1.30). I tried my best to understand the meaning behind this sentence by reading over and over again the surrounding pages as well as utilizing the book’s context clues, however, intuition ended up helping me the most.
After a while, I managed to get an idea of what Ferdinand meant. It is likely that Ferdinand prefers to cause wear to his own body rather than see Miranda do work that could be considered “lowly” as it is clear that he respects and admires her, he even refers to her as a “precious culture.” Understanding why Ferdinand rejected Miranda’s offer to help him made me interested in knowing whether his decision was out of heart, or to not appear weak or less masculine.
Not only was the sentence quite confusing to me, but some of the words used in it as well, particularly “sinews,” which is not part of my daily vocabulary. After doing some research, I learned that it refers to the bands that connect the muscles to the bones. Understanding this allowed me to imagine what Ferdinand was saying more in detail.
Ferdinand’s refusing Miranda to help him was something I found interesting as well. I agree that he admires Miranda and has a desire to protect her. I like that you pointed out the possibility of him doing it so he does not appear less weak. I also wonder if he was trying to impress Miranda or just conform to traditional gender roles.
I would say Act 3 is the most intense play so far in the reading. Many things are going on in Act 3, but the part where Caliban and Staphano meet is what I find most interesting. In “The Tempest” Act 3 Scene 2, I saw the theme of power, and revenge demonstrated again within Caliban, Stephano, and Trinculo. At the beginning of Act 3 Scene 2, a shift of power is shown in Caliban. In the line “How does thy honor? Let me lick thy shoe. I’ll not serve him. He’s not valiant.”(3.2.7-9) Caliban shifts from Prospero’s servant to Stephano’s servant. Caliban’s decision reflects his dissatisfaction with Prospero. Under the influence of alcohol, Caliban mistakes him as a god and decides to serve Stephano as his new master.
Later in Act 3 Scene 2, Caliban tells how he suffers on the island. In the line “As I told thee before, I am subject to a tyrant, a sorcerer that by his cunning hath cheated me of the island.”(3.2.43-44) Caliban complains about Prospero and shows his rebellion against Prospero. Caliban even comes up with a plan on how to kill Prospero in the line “Yes, yes, my lord. I’ll take you to where he sleeps, and you can pound a nail into his head.”(3.2.59-60)
I find this scene really funny because I have an image of three drunk men in my head, discussing how they are going to take over the island. The irony is that, while they believe they are planning a sophisticated and planned takeover of the island, their drunken state makes their plans embarrassingly unrealistic. The scene shows the issue of power playfully, emphasizing the folly and absurdity of their ambitions.
Hi Yunxiang Xu I also think that in Act 3 so many things are happening. I think you chose a good and funny scene