# data[].attributes.body
The textbook chapter honestly helped a lot with my understanding of the play. I was vaguely familiar with it before reading it again for this class, and once I did read it I had the sort of barebones structure. I especially liked thinking about the human and fae as two sides of the same coin- the "real" world and the fantasy world, the natural and supernatural, the almost duality of the fae world, holding responsibility and rigidity that also hosts chaos and whimsy within it. (Also, I think Puck is the ultimate Lord of Misrule here, though he's instructed by Oberon. Oberon himself has a little less whimsy about him.)

I do think it would be a mistake to assume that Midsummer or really any of Shakespeare's comedies are simply there to make you laugh, to be benign and subtextually uncomplicated. Shakespeare was a smart guy, he knew what he was doing, and frankly, I think he was too smart to be doing straightforward stuff without getting bored. Learning about the carnivalesque aspect of this play in particular made me think a lot more about his habit of subverting or reinforcing power structures within his narratives. I like Bakhtin's way of looking at it- I think there's almost a sociological aspect to it that I, as a sociology major, really enjoy. For example, the textbook talks about how Titania isn't a "shrinking maid." She instead fits far more into the usual mythological pattern of gods pursuing mortals, usually with dogged persistence and displays of power. At a time where women were expected to be sexually submissive (they still are, but particularly in Shakespeare's time), the way she directs her time with Bottom is subversive in and of itself. She's a queen, and she's fae, and so the rules of the human world don't apply to her. This essentially looked like a way for Shakespeare to do that kind of subversion while still having plausible deniability for why and how it happens. He seems to do this a lot, slipping things under the radar that you'd have to be paying attention in a certain way to get. It feels like getting a message in code, and I really like figuring those out. It's probably my favorite thing about Shakespeare.

# data[].attributes.body
Before reading the chapter in Essential Shakespeare, my feelings of the play were not too impressed. I believed it to be short, clever story that had good little turns that you could predicted to happen. I saw the power plays through the King and the laws about how Hermia would have to listen to her father in an arranged marriage or die or be a nun for the rest of her life. And the humor that was in the scenes in the woods with the meddling of the fairy king and Puck his servant. It seemed basic and that it didn’t have as many layers. But, after reading the chapter my views have changed. The chapter added some depth and layers to the play, making it more meaningful. I guess I couldn’t understand all that they were saying to each other. With the implications that both the fairy king and queen both had affairs with Thesus and Hippolyta or the elements of rape. The chapter goes into the themes of unstable love and hierarchy and power. It allowed me to see deeper into the relationships we see in the play. How we see power or pride in love in how Thesus proclaims he conquered Hippolyta and now gets her love or with Hermia and Egeus, her father, and Demetrius in how the man has power and control over the woman in making decisions for her and buying or controlling her love. And in Oberon and Titania and how he wants revenge on Titania for cheating and wanting her changeling boy, where he makes her fall in love with a “beast” and then reverses it and gains her love back through manipulation. Seeing overall how this play relates to Ovid’s Metamorphoses and sources helps and depth to the play that I only saw on the surface level. I believe it will take me a little while to read Shakespeare better and understand it.

# data[].attributes.body
Reading the Essential Shakespeare Chapter was a great way to give more accurate terms to themes I feel I have read before. I always thought of Midsummer Night's Dream as bacchic rather than carnivalesque, which is a slightly darker, significantly earlier way of subverting hierarchies. Bacchic festivals would have heightened eroticism as a festival of fertility and drunkenness or madness was a massive part of the festivals as well, infact the dance the mechanicals reference is likely one of these bacchic dances which would have consisted of phallic imagery and had an emphasis on a sense of madness or drunkenness rather than laughter as a subversive quality. This chapter helped me understand that in a little more of a modern context of adding comedy rather than the release of frenzy and fertility, but I think bacchic tendencies also fit in very well with the idea of transformation and sexuality of animalistic nature. There is a common theme throughout history of nature being an opposition to man and 'civility' and the idea of needing to 'tame' or 'control' it. There was an emphasis on Ovid's Metamorphosis, which was really interesting, it oddly enough wasn't something I fully registered before but it's clear in the sexuality and idea of transformations and I did really enjoy the way that it was turned on its head and the implications of power balances being flipped of Titania holding power over Bottom but she was not the one responsible for his transformation but she is a significantly more powerful creature than him. An interesting point in the transformation is inherent sexuality and wildness and trickery, and while this story places the power of the transformation in the hands of Oberon and not Titania, that is not an inherently impossible thing either, such imagery appears in transformation stories, but it is rather a combination of the two themes of transformation as punishment and transformation as a sexual act.

# data[].attributes.body
I've had to read this play several times over at this point, and write numerous papers on it. I honestly can't say that there isn't much about the play I haven't been made to heavily consider in terms of themes and general messages. The chapter honestly didn't change all that much from the experience for me. It was interesting learning about ovid's involvement in the themes.

It's interesting to me to see peter brook's performance was revolutionary for suggesting that the supernatural world and the human world were considered to coexist alongside each other. Maybe it's just me and my fantasy brain, but I kinda always assumed that this perspective was implies. After all the fairies do interfere quite a bit with the plot, and fae are kinda naturally association with the forces of nature and being imcomprehensible beings to humans. To me, I just kinda assumed that this would be the angle that most people would take when representing the story.

# data[].attributes.body
Before our class on Tuesday, I am not sure if I had a complete enough understanding of the play for the textbook’s chapter to have reframed my thinking. However, I did find the textbook chapter to be very interesting and it definitely made me reconsider the play through a new lens. The textbook states, “Within the play’s different spheres, we see this misuse of power, fractious emotions and the potential for disaster” (13). I find the ‘potential for disaster’ to be particularly interesting. For me, the play was chaotic to read, with the old English language and the multiple plotlines working together against comprehension. However, I can appreciate the disorienting feeling the play gives you when I take into consideration this element of possible danger or disaster.

For example, I believe the way Helena throws herself at the feet of Demetrius seems innocent enough [like he just left her for her friend and she can’t seem to move on], but the way she speaks to him puts herself in a position that could end up disastrous. In one scene, Helena states, “I am your spaniel, and, Demetrius, / The more you beat me I will fawn on you. / Use me but as your spaniel: spurn me, strike me, / Neglect me, lose me; only give me leave / (Unworthy as I am) to follow you” (MND 2.1 222-27). When you give yourself to someone in this manner, it could be disastrous for your future safety and well being.

Another quote from the book that is noteworthy to me occurs when the author is discussing Peter Brook’s 1970 production of the play. The textbook reads, “This revolutionary technique makes two points… second, suggesting that the supernatural world is ever-present, interacting with the human world, whether benignly or not” (25). I believe this is an interesting way to look at Shakespeare’s original work as well, not just the 1970 play. The fairies are interfering with the humans throughout the play and controlling a lot of the story, it appears. Tatania interfered with the human world when she adopted the changeling boy, as well as when she and Bottom were entangled due to the love spell. Oberon interferes with the humans  ordering the administration of the love spells, as well as when he and Puck decide they should right their wrongs and undo the love spells. The multiple plot lines that occur at the same time show how everyone is connected and how forces humans may not understand are always at play. The interchangeability of the four young lovers is laughable but also may stand to point out how one’s fate can be altered quickly through no choice of one’s own.

# data[].attributes.body
After reading the first chapter of "Essential Shakespeare," about the carnivalesque has definitely made me question my previous readings of the play and have caused for more analysis as we talk about the text. The carnivalesque seems simple enough, prior to the chapter's definition, but upon further reading and reflecting on my recent reading of the text, I see how these fun and festive elements are not as gleeful and simple as they seem. Recalling from Tuesday's conversation, the binary differences between man/women court/forest become highlighted in Bathkin's concept that there is a "fundamental questioning of the masculine authority." When specifically talking about the relationship between men and women, there are multiple relationships where the societal norm of "obey your male authority figure" is ignored (Hermia and her father, Oberon and Titiana, etc.) Going back to the idea of the carnivalesque, in addition to being funny and festive, it can also critique a mock a system or concept, mocking/ridicule, so in this case, Shakespeare makes it clear that he is making fun of these societal structures that are meant to be happy, but in reality, only brings to the light the flaws of such a case. Additionally, I would like to touch on another point: how Shakespeare makes fun of young love. After reading this chapter, I truly understand what Prof. Angelo was saying in class. While it's seen by typical readers as passionate and romantic, now looking at the love square that is Hermia, Helena, Lysander and Demetrius, it becomes clear to me how this fickleness in love is not as romantic as it might seem upon first read, regardless of magic. Also, the section about the rhyme and meter was nice and helpful, as for putting into perspective how it is used specifically for this play!

# data[].attributes.body
A Midsummer Night’s Dream was a bit of a difficult read for me personally. I was initially expecting it to be around the length of a novel, only to realize that well over half of my physical edition consisted of sources, commentary, criticism, and alternate versions. It felt strange to know that the story was over so early into the pages. It also took me some time to get readjusted to reading Shakespeare, as I do not look over or read play scripts often.

As for the play itself, I mostly thought it was just ok. I had to reread some parts to make sure I understood what was going on, and even then I probably misinterpreted something. What really surprised me was how fast the play seemed to end once I got into the swing of things. It felt like as soon as I had reached the good part, it was over. I liked the contrast between all of the groups of characters, too. In a way, it felt like each character was a parallel to at least a few others, and that is a sign of a good cast.

I feel like our in-class lecture on A Midsummer Night’s Dream really helped me understand why the play is a comedy. I never would have been able to guess that Theseus and Hippolyta were meant to be played by the same actors as Oberon and Titania, or that the small group of regular Athenians were meant to look interchangeable. Knowing that I was supposed to be confused by who was who is both reassuring and admittingly very funny in retrospect. Overall, while the play might not have been my personal favorite, I can understand why it became one of Shakespeare’s most successful comedies and would definitely recommend it to anybody who is interested.

# data[].attributes.body
After reading the chapter on the carnivalesque and learning about Mikhail Bakhtin’s ideas, it honestly changed the way I look at A Midsummer Night’s Dream. I actually read this play back in high school and always thought it was interesting mostly because of how ridiculous and funny the love situations were. The idea that love could be so strong that people act completely irrational and with full reckless abandon always seemed really comedic to me, especially in high school when everything feels dramatic anyway. What always stood out to me was how funny it was that two people could be so deeply in love, and then just a little bit of magic completely destroys that and spreads the obsession around to other characters. It always felt bizarre to me how quickly emotions could flip, but after reading about Bakhtin and the carnivalesque, it makes way more sense. Bakhtin talks about how carnival temporarily flips normal rules, social order, and behavior, which is exactly what happens in the forest. The forest becomes this space where authority doesn’t really matter, people act on wild emotions, and social boundaries blur, like when Titania falls in love with Bottom, who is literally transformed into something ridiculous. Before, I mostly saw these moments as just comedy, but now I see them as part of this bigger idea that chaos actually allows characters to explore emotions and parts of themselves that normal society in Athens wouldn’t allow. Bakhtin’s idea that carnival is messy, exaggerated, and over-the-top really connects to how Shakespeare spreads the love obsession across multiple characters, almost like emotions are contagious. It also makes the ending feel more meaningful because once everyone returns to normal society, relationships feel more stable after all that chaos. Overall, Bakhtin helped me see that the weirdness and confusion in the play isn’t just random humor, but a way of showing how breaking social rules for a short time can actually help restore balance and understanding in the end.

# data[].attributes.body
A Midsummer Nights dream at first impression was hard for me to comprehend but after a couple of reviews of the play I have a better understanding of it. after several viewing of the play I got to appreciate how the play handles the parallels between many things within the plays. With Theseus and Hippolyta's relationship being paralleled with Oberon and Titania with how strained their relationships are at the beginning of the play and how we see them evolve over time. These themes of parallels also permeate throughout the setting of the play where the court is established by its law and order and its neatness when the characters arrive within the forest that the fairies reside full of chaos and disorder and within that the squabble of Oberon and Titania are having is throwing everything out of balance causing the weather and seasons to be all out of order and trying to get to a resolution to fix all of their chaos is the main point of the play from their point of view. Another point of the play I found very interesting to follow was the escapades of the mechanics and trying to make their production get off the ground to perform in front of court especially following Bottom who I think is the most endearing character within the play and how much he tries to do everything and is so passionate about it you can't help but just come to an understanding of him. Overall this play was entertaining read when I came around to understanding it and I love the use of parallels within the play creates a lot of themes that I found very interesting to follow and finding out all of the parallels between the characters and especially trying to map out the character's relationships was something I found myself doing to help make the read of the play more digestible for me and I can look back on it for when I need to talk about this play in the future.

# data[].attributes.body
I have never been a big fan of Dream, for reasons that include timing and type of play that are too involved to explain. However, I do appreciate its varied forms of verse throughout.

Unfortunately, the carnivalesque aspects of the play are my least favorite, so I was pleased to read some commentary on the subject that broadened the appeal of the play overall. Particularly, I appreciated learning more about the Ovid source material. In addition, I had never delved into the full story of Pyramus and Thisbe. I found the commentary on that subject very insightful.

Though I have seen a number of different staged performances each seems to have been noisy for me-which I found to be distracting. In many performances the braying of Bottom was always grating to me; along with a lot of fairies running around the stage. Can I admit that I have seen Pucks that I wanted to punch (just kidding-sorta).

Reading the play is a different experience. My first read was pure confusion-what is a changeling? Is it Hermia or Helena that loves Lysander-or was it Demetrius? Who awakened and saw who? Over time (and a number of performances) I get it. I have long looked at Dream as an introduction to Shakespeare. I have seen watered down pared versions performed for elementary and middle school children (8th Grade). They generally seem to enjoy it, particularly a very spirited Puck.

Still, you can’t beat Dream for the poetry throughout. From simple couplets to full-throated soliloquies, to songs the verse is well, Shakespeare, and that’s always been enough for me.

Dream, in short, is initially a story of two young lovers who are to be kept apart by the girl’s father. It turns out to be a comedy. Romeo & Juliet is the story of young lovers who are separated by family history. It is a consummate tragedy. Why? What is the difference? I have heard theories that Dream is comic because it takes a would be tragic pair of star-crossed lovers and shows how tenuous that inseparable love might be. Double the couples-even times four (Lysander/Hermia; Demetrius/Helena; Theseus/Hippolyta and Oberon/Titania) and the circumstances are made comic.

I am always looking for references to Shakespeare’s work-or I see specters of Shakespeare in subsequent modern theater and songs, poetry and prose…I think of the Chris Thile (Punch Brothers)* lyric, “[Singing] lovers live in a dream that keeps coming true/Go back to sleep my daughter/Go back to sleep my wife/I’m waiting for you there.”

*Highly recommended

# data[].attributes.body
I had previously read and watched this performance back in high school, so going into this play, I already had a general idea of what this play was about. However, when I was re-reading, this play, I realized that even after reading this play already four years ago, I still struggled to understand what the characters were actually saying to each other in the play and figure out what emotions they were projecting to the reader/audience. However, something that I do like about this play, compared to the other plays that we will be reading later on in this class is that this play is considered a romantic comedy. I really like plays like this rather than his plays about tragedy.

Anyways, back to this play, I definitely did struggle reading this play, and there were times where I had to look into the Shakespeare glossary and find words that I did not know the meaning of, which made me feel like I was bound to failure in understanding the Shakespearean language. Something that I did do after reading through the whole play was I watched a film adaptation of the play to get that visual picture in my head and tried re-reading the play while watching the film to get a better understand on how the characters were truly feeling in the moment of each scene.

One thing that I think is worth noting is that one character that I enjoyed revisiting in this play is the character, Helena. She has to go through a lot of ups and downs in this play, from being rejected multiple times by Demetrius for her love, to the shift of both Lysander and Demetrius falling in love with her due to Puck giving them a love potion, and overall, she is a character who struggles with her self-confidence and feeling truly loved by someone. Which really upset me when reading this play, because all I wanted was for Helena to be happy and not suffer anymore in this story.

In short, I really enjoyed re-reading this play, and I feel like starting with this play in class was a good start because the lesson of this play for me is very straight-forward is: do not mess with the complexity of love, because it can lead to conflict, and again, it is not natural. Granted, this play does include magic and is not realistic to what can happen in our world today, but in short, do not mess with love because it could end with you falling in love with a man who turns into a half-man-half-donkey.

# data[].attributes.body
I am class lead for this text on Thursday so I don't know how much of this post will be overlap with what I plan to discuss in class. For starters, me trying to sit down and not only read, but COMPREHEND this was a battle. I had to re-read the first page, no joke, probably three times before I was like "oh okay this is what it means". And I feel kind of dumb saying that, even more so being a secondary ed English major, but that honestly gave me more insight to how students may approach this text. It is hard! It is super challenging trying to read something that is written so differently than how we speak and read today. However, once I finally understoof the first page, it was like I was attuned to Shakespeare, and since then, it has been relatively easy to know what is going on.

I am not fully done reading yet, but the start of the play, at least for my interpretation, set it up to read like a drama. You have this King or Duke, another guy named Egeus with his daughter and then these two men who are in love with her. I was like oh okay, we see this plot line in a lot of media today, and through this, made an assumption about how the play was going to unfold. But now it seems like the play is surrounding Oberon and Tita, the fairies, so that threw me off. This made it more interesting to me, and gave Shakespeare more depth in my mind. That he is able to balance and intertwine multiple story lines to merge into one production. I am realizing I have never really given Shakespeare as much credit as I should have.

I also had to do some research while reading. There are a lot of outside references throughout this play to Greek mythology. I understood some, having had an interest in this growing up, but I was not aware that these Greek references would have been widely known to the viewers of Shakespeare's plays. Through class discussions, and now this, I am realizing I thought people in the Elizabethen area were lot less knowledgeable than they were. I was under the assumption that only educated or people of status would have been exposed to works of Greek mythology. However, I learned that "classical" mythology was embedded in Elizabethen education. This tells me that probably everyone living at the time had some knowledge as to what these references were, either through direct exposure, or word of mouth.