This is a fun little scene in Love's Labour's Lost (Act II Scene I). There is a lot of foreshadowing made by the Princess of France. Here is one example that I read about...When conversing with the king (who has already broken his oath by talking with her) she says
You will the sooner, that I were away;
For you'll prove perjured if you make me stay
Definition of Perjured: involving willfully told untruths.
In other words the queen is saying, "if I stay you're going to break your oath and you'll be a liar." Shakespeare cleverly uses the Princess' confidence to foreshadow (scroll down on the link's website for more examples of foreshadowing) the rest of the play. There is a possible theme to show the power of women against the word of man. Shakespeare may be hinting at thoughts about Catholic Priests and their vows of celibacy.
Source:
http://www.sparknotes.com/shakespeare/labours/section2.rhtml
Wow, I like that reference to celibacy. Do you think Shakespeare is saying it is "impossible" for a man to swear off women? There are certainly some arguments about the "carnal nature" of man that would make it seem like celibacy is a lost cause. And we know that celibacy has no part in the LDS faith. But is there a place for celibacy? Or is it bound to fail?
ReplyDeleteI think Shakespeare is saying that its pretty unrealistic for men to be sworn off women. I agree with him! :) Celibacy... hmm. Women are here for a reason right? Talk to em! ;) haha sorry for the randombess :)
ReplyDelete*randomness*
ReplyDeleteWell going back to what Dr. Burton said in class, it makes one think of a mission. . .I mean for two years, said missionary is in a similar situation as these guys, who are swearing off girls entirely for three years to focus on studies.
ReplyDeleteIn all fairness, neither missionary or scholar has to remain in a state of celibacy forever, unlike the Catholic priests or nuns. So yeah, maybe Shakespeare is saying that it's unrealistic to swear off of the opposite gender for good.
I also had to laugh to myself when I read this, because it also makes me think of the effect that the "swearing off of girls" has on some guys, even just for the two years. Some of 'em come back a little crazy, with what I call "RM [Return Missionary] Syndrome, also sometimes referred to as a Mr. Collin's Complex [Jane Austin reference]. In other words, all they can think about is "I need to get married! Right now! Any girl will do!" and begin to terrorize girls in their over-rushed quest to marry. There seems to be at least one in every singles ward. . . unfortunately, including my own. Don't worry though, I carry pepper spray so I'll probably be fine. . . Anyway. That's what this whole situation makes me think of . . .and enjoy it because I can totally relate.
I agree here that perhaps Shakespeare is not implying celibacy, but more along the lines that it is not necessary to be completely out of touch with women. From reading other Shakespeare plays I don't think that he is also saying that women are carnal and should be avoided at all costs. I think this is more of a comedic tool to show the flaws of men- that they simply cannot resist contact with women. Because this is a comedy, the environment is not condescending or particularly critical of the situation. It's making humor of it.
ReplyDeleteWith J.J's comment though, I bet that would be an interesting analysis. Does celibacy have a place in our society today.. A bit different than in shakespeares times I guess, but still, very interesting. I'm so not qualified to make any type of thesis on that though.
Bringing up the awkward RMs makes me laugh. When I came home from my mission, I was starting another semester at BYU less than a week later. And I went on a date less than two weeks later. At the time, I thought I was awesome and had totally beat that curse of awkwardness. But looking back...I realize...I probably terrorized those girls, like the guy in your ward, Christa. Haha
ReplyDelete