-
Essay / The artist as performer in the play A Midsummer Night's Dream
When James Joyce was a teenager, a friend asked him if he had ever been in love. He replied: "How could I write the most perfect love songs of our time if I were in love - A poet must always write about a past or future emotion, never about a present emotion - The work of a poet is to write tragedies, not be an actor at a time” (Ellman 62) I mention this because – after replacing the word “comedy” with “tragedy” and leaving a little leeway on the meaning of the word “. actor" - Joyce unconsciously gives the argument from A Midsummer Night's Dream about the role of the artist. That is, an artist must be removed from the action or, at least, not. not be subject to normal temptations This emotional distance gives the artist the type of perspective Theseus equates to that of a madman However, it also gives the artist a point of view from which he can make meaning. to the experiences of other characters Therefore, I will argue that, in A Midsummer Night's Dream, Shakespeare views the artist as someone who is removed from the main action of the play, but who provides meaning. to the experience of the play (both for the audience and for the other characters). I'll show this by examining the roles of the two artist counterparts: Bottom (who replaces Peter Quince as the artist of Every Mother's Son) and Puck (whose art changes people's hearts and minds). My first four paragraphs show how Shakespeare allegorically uses Puck and Bottom to represent two different components of the artistic mind. Second, I show how Shakespeare leaves them emotionally removed from the main action of the play. Finally, I will show how they end up interpreting the piece, thereby giving it meaning. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get an Original Essay It is important to show that Puck and Bottom are very similar characters. I don't want to suggest that they are interchangeable – as, for example, Hermia and Helena are. Rather, Puck and Bottom are counterparts, each representing a different component of the artistic spirit. Shakespeare gives them enough similarities to draw attention to the fact that they share a common artistic bond. For example, they both use their art in the service of leaders. Puck changes people's hearts at Oberon's request. Even when he acts on his own - when he turns Bottom into a donkey - he ends up serving his master's purposes. Bottom also uses his art to serve a ruler. He is determined to perform before Theseus. In fact, he is so keen to entertain Theseus that he volunteers for every role in the play. By having Bottom and Puck both serve the rulers, Shakespeare highlights the artistic relationship between the two characters. Another way in which Shakespeare links Puck and Bottom is through their differences. This seems paradoxical, but it is not. Their differences are so pronounced that the audience can't help but contrast them, thus linking them in the audience's mind. For example, Shakespeare makes Puck full of mischief and misanthropy (e.g. "Oh, what fools these mortals are"). The name "Robin Goodfellow" was a popular name for the devil, which gives some idea of how it would have been received in Shakespeare's time (Bloom 151). Bottom, on the other hand, is simple and user-friendly. His arrogance as an actor seems motivated more by his passion to please Theseus than by a self-congratulatory nature. The other mechanics like him personally and worry about him when he disappears. In addition, it bindsof friendship with Titania's child servants, even though Titania offered him more selfish pleasures. His name suggests earth, or being firmly grounded (Bloom 152). This takes on special meaning in relation to Puck, who as a sprite is associated with air and sky. The reason Shakespeare goes to such lengths to connect Bottom and Puck - and I go to such lengths to emphasize their relationship - is because they represent two intrinsic parts of the artistic mind. Bottom represents a visceral approach to art. He objects to the depiction of Pyramus' suicide, lest the women in the audience be overcome with grief. He becomes so emotionally attached to his art that he cannot understand the rational difference between art and reality. Puck, on the other hand, represents the art of the mind. By that I mean his art takes place in the minds of other characters. His art has such a profound impact on the minds of Demetrius and Lysander that they give up their only distinguishing characteristic (their love for Helen). Puck's art not only manipulates the deepest beliefs of his subjects' minds, it also leaves them struggling to express their experience. In this way, Puck's art engages the minds of his subjects even after he is done with them. Even Bottom's mind - otherwise inactive - tries to make sense of his experience: I had a dream, beyond the intelligence of man to say what dream it was -. I thought I was - and I thought I had - but the man is but I'll be a patched-up fool if he offers to say what I thought I had. The eye of man has not heard, the ear of man has not seen, the hand of man cannot taste, his tongue cannot conceive, and his heart is not able to tell what my dream was. I will ask Peter Quince to write a ballad of this dream: it will be called "Bottom's Dream" because it has no bottom (IV.1.203-217). It's primarily a comedic speech, but Bottom takes it very seriously. Puck's art has affected his mind in a very real way, and he struggles to make sense of it. He ultimately calls it a bottomless dream, suggesting that it was a passive, visceral experience. This suits an artist who becomes emotionally attached to their art, but cannot think about it rationally. We are also far from Puck, an artist who deals with the mind, but who seems incapable of experiencing human emotions. For these reasons, I argue that Puck and Bottom represent two necessary but opposing components of the artistic spirit. If, as I have said, Puck and Bottom represent the role of the artist, it is important to discern exactly what Shakespeare is trying to talk about about that role. First, they are both emotionally removed from the main action of the play. I said earlier that Bottom is an emotional character, and this is true in that he believes that art is a purely emotional experience. However, when it comes to his own actions, he remains oblivious to all kinds of emotions. When the other mechanics run away, leaving him stranded in the woods, all he does is sing silly songs. His composure seems somewhat shocking, considering his friends just ran away screaming. This alludes to an inability to feel the appropriate emotion during a serious moment. The most striking example of Bottom's emotional detachment appears in his relationship with Titania. Although he may have consummated his relationship with the beautiful fairy queen, it is clear that he does not share her enthusiasm for this relationship. A good example of this comes from one of their first exchanges: Titania. You are wise as you are beautiful. Below. This is not the case either; but if I had enough wit to go outof this wood, I have enough to serve mine. Titania. Outside of this wood, I do not want to go; you will stay here whether you like it or not. (3.1.147-153) Even after the flattery (which I suppose rarely happens for Bottom), she basically has to threaten him to stay. in the woods with her. What does the audience think of Bottom's lack of interest in Titania? This becomes more complicated, considering that he was eager to star in a big love story. Clearly, it seems that Bottom would rather play a lover than actually be a lover. This is because he is an artist and must distance himself from the action he is trying to depict. This emotional distance from love gives him the perspective he needs to portray love in the final act. In this way, Shakespeare suggests that an artist's role should be distanced from the main action. Puck has a similar attitude of emotional detachment. This is not to say that he does not take pleasure in his work – he has the same kind of maniacal love of evil that Falstaff has of laziness – but only that he is not interested in his own product. The audience never sees him using his art for his own purposes (with the exception of his transformation of Bottom into a donkey). He seems to have no romantic desires, which is strange for a fairy whose art deals with love. Besides, we know that fairies can experience such feelings. Titania and Oberon are in love and their early banter indicates that they are rather vigorous characters. Why does Shakespeare put a character with no romantic desires at the center of a play about romantic love - I offer the same answer I gave about Bottom - Puck, unlike Titania and Oberon, is a artist and must therefore distance himself emotionally. This emotional distance gives him a perspective from which he can interpret the experience of the play and make sense of it. In this regard, Shakespeare once again says that an artist must be emotionally removed from the main action of the play. The purpose of emotional distance—and, indeed, the purpose of all art—is to make sense of experience. In the final act, Puck and Bottom interpret the meaning of the play in different, but not opposing, ways. Mechanical play represents the high point of Bottom's art, and it is also the only area where the Athenians' actions make sense. The play represents the ridiculousness of true love. Although the irony is not perceived by the Athenians - and probably by the players themselves - they have just had a ridiculous experience that ends in true love. Even the language highlights the similarities between the play and the Athenian experience. For example, when Bottom, as Pyramus, says: Sweet Moon, I thank thee for thy sunny rays; 272-275) It seems typically ridiculous that Pyramus would trust something as precarious as the moon. At the same time, it is remarkably similar to Hermia's speech in the first act, where she swears her love to Lysander on "Cupid's mightiest bow" (1.1.169). (Hippolyte had just compared the moon to Cupid's bow 160 lines earlier). Bottom interprets the character's experiences for his own benefit. In doing so, he gives meaning to their experiences. It is understandable that this is a ridiculous interpretation, because the Athenians had just undergone a ridiculous experience. Puck also gives meaning to the experience of the play, but he does so for the audience, not the other characters. His final speech suggests a way for the audience to accept the play: If we shadows have offended, Think of this and all will be righted, That you only slept here While these visions appeared, And this theme weak and idle Gives no more than a dream (5.1.423-428)Puck.. 1997.