Much Ado About an AP rating?

Is Much Ado About Nothing worthy of an AP rating? I actually struggled with this  question. While on one hand, it’s Shakespeare, and I’m sure I barely scratched the surface of any deeper meaning the play held. On the other hand, it was not that hard to follow. I found that I understood characters intentions, reasonings behind their actions, and how their plans were carried out. I didn’t have to take many pauses to thin deeply about some passage. To an extent that’s good! It made reading the play much more enjoyable. Although it sounds bad, the fact that it was purely enjoyable reading and watching Much Ado About Nothing makes me question its AP level. While there were other AP books that I enjoyed as a whole. I was always confused during at least part of the book. And to a degree that is good, it forces me to read deeper into the book. As a whole however, this book should be read by AP classes. While I did not find it to be the most complex of Shakespeare’s works, it was not empty, and there was plenty of analysis to be had. I believe that this would be a great ‘first Shakespeare’ read. Many students steer far away from Shakespeare, and I think that starting with an easily understood comedy like this play would be extremely beneficial in getting students involved in Shakespeare. I can’t say that I struggled to find themes or symbols during this play, however I do believe that it is a great AP book in that it could open a student's eyes to Shakespeare as a whole.

And so I conclude my blog on Shakespeare’s Much Ado About Nothing. I was slightly hesitant to choose Shakespeare to begin with. While I do enjoy performing his works, I was not sure how I would feel about reading the play through. The comedic style and laughable attitude of many characters instantly made this book a hit, and it is one that I would gladly read again and strongly suggest for other students.

How Much aDO I Like the Play?

For someone not taking a Shakespeare course, I feel as if I have read much of his work. I have performed in Pericles: Prince of Tyre,  and Measure for Measure, and I have read Julius Caesar, Romeo and Juliet, Macbeth, and seen a different adaptation of Hamlet. After finishing Much Ado About Nothing, I can say without a doubt that I have a new favorite. I am someone who loves comedy, and I was surprised at how much I understood the jokes the first time around. Usually, when understanding Shakespeare it takes a couple run throughs to find the deeper meaning. In this play however, it seems as if Shakespeare’s style was different. This play didn’t seem to hide deep ideas, or show secret views of society, it was made for enjoyment. It showed the witty, joking side of Shakespeare. I figured that I would enjoy the comedy style, I suppose I just didn’t think Shakespeare had it in him to create a work that I could see myself reading multiple times. I found that characters like Bendick were relatable in his use of puns, I found that the constant deception throughout the novel showed a humorous aspect to falling in love, and provided strong irony throughout the duration of the play. Compared to his other works, I thought that this play was readable. Not in the sense of enjoying watching or performing, or even literal reading. I have always enjoyed studying and reading Shakespeare throughout high school. No, this play was readable in the sense that I could find myself reading it on a rainy Sunday afternoon. The written form itself is made to create a mental story. As a somewhat thespian who greatly enjoys plays, I hope I can someday see my favorite of Shakespeare’s masterpieces live.

Would I suggest someone else read this? Yes and no. I read the play, but I also watched it be performed on youtube. If given the option, I would suggest the latter. I find that it is much easier to understand the language from listening to the play, and I believe that the correct emphasis of certain lines that made the play so enjoyable is better shown through a performance. While it is good to read the play, I believe the true masterpiece can only be see in the form it was meant to hold; a play.

Much Ado about Symbols

For any piece of work to be considered ‘AP’ worthy, it must contain some symbolism. For Much Ado About Nothing one consistent symbol is that of horns. Now, in pop culture today horns may seem irrelevant, and not represent anything specific. In Shakespeare’s time however, horns represent marriage, more specifically a man being forced into marriage. Early in the play, this symbol is established, by Bendick stating:

“The savage bull may; but if ever the sensible Benedick bear it, pluck off the bull's horns and set them in my forehead, and let me be vilely painted, and in such great letters as they write "Here is good horse to hire," let them signify under my sign "Here you may see Benedick the married man.”(MY BOOK IS MISSING IN ACTION, THIS QUOTE IS IN Act I, Scene I)

The symbolism of horns also tied the beginning of the play to the end, giving the play a sense of closure. While at the beginning Benedick uses horns negatively, Claudio uses them in a positive way, stating that Benidick “thinks upon the savage bull. Tush, fear not, man. We’ll tip thy horns with gold, And all Europa shall rejoice at thee”(MY BOOK MISSING, Act V, Scene IV). What Claudio is saying is that although Benedick is marrying, he is not wearing the horns of a whipped man, he is proudly showing golden horns, a sign of honor and goodness. For me, this is what gave the thematic pieces of the story a complete ending. I always enjoy when stories tie back to the very beginning, and this tale uses the same symbols in the opening pages as it does in the closing lines. Horns may not make sense to a modern reader, however after doing a little digging, the symbol reveals its true prowess, and fits perfectly into the play.

Much Ado about Theme

One major topic that has been discussed multiple times throughout my blog posts is one of the major themes; marriage. From the beginning of the play we see different views of love and marriage. Claudio enters Leonato’s castle, sees Hero, and states his intentions to marry her. Counterly, Benedick enters Leonato’s castle, sees Beatrice, and swears off marriage. By the end of the play, both of these couples had married(How many times have I said this).

One of the draft ideas about marriage throughout the play is that it is seen as a necessary thing. Claudio and Hero both seem to believe that one cannot achieve a full life without marriage, and while she appears tough Beatrice may be hiding her secret desire for a husband. One of the conundrums I had while reading the play was that throughout the duration love and marriage is mainly discussed using negative terms, however the entire plot comes back to the marriage between different pairs of characters. For example, Benedick describes himself as falling “horribly in love”(77) with Beatrice. Usually, one does not describe their love as horrible. Yet everything comes back to marriage. For Beatrice, marriage seems to be more of a trap. She has opportunities to marry, Don Pedro proposes to her, however she refuses, and it is almost as if she simply dislikes the idea of being a wife. We know that Beatrice is a bit of a feminist, and it isn’t extremely surprising that she finds the institution of marriage from the past as undesirable. Many different characters throw themselves into marriage, or swear it off, but the underlying idea beneath the skin of dialogue is the necessity of marriage to the characters in the story.

Tying directly into marriage is the theme of love. At different points in the novel it is clear that none of the characters desperately seek out love, it just sortof happens. It almost seems like love is secondary to marriage. As I mentioned previously, everything seems to come back to the importance of being married; where is the importance of loving? While Claudio and Hero fall in love quickly, they didn’t seek each other out, they just fell in love. As for Benedick and Beatrice, the opposite occurred. They attempted to escape from love, and seemed to battle each other with hatred. However, they too fell for eachother. So I guess the theme isn’t love a whole, it is the inevitability of love. You can swear it off, you can run from it, you can ignore it, but love always finds you.

Much Ado about Characters

Novels and plays try to accomplish the same goals, in different ways. In novels, characters are described in a variety of ways, one of which being a paragraph or description of a certain character. In a play, however, the difficulty that the writer faces during the characterization process is that the viewer only gets to see the characters interactions and actions. It then becomes very important to make any scene a character is a part of extremely detailed and representative of that character as a whole.

My personal favorite character in the play is Benedick, for one main reason. He is punny and quick on his feet. As someone who loves puns I found myself connected with this character instantly. As mentioned in a past blog post, Benedick swears off love, wishing to be a bachelor forever. However, he falls in love with Beatrice. One of my favorite conversations in the story is when Benedick is trying to put up a front about his dislike for Beatrice. He begs Don Pedro, the man he serves under to

“command me any service to the world’s end? I will go on the slightest errand now to the Antipodes that you can devise to send me on. I will fetch you a toothpicker from the furthest inch of Asia . . . do you any embassage to the pygmies, rather than hold three words’ conference with this harpy.”(MY BOOK WAS MISSING IN ACTION, THIS QUOTE WAS IN ACT II SCENE I)

This quote show Benedick’s desire to be away from Beatrice, saying he would rather be sent across the world to fight than to talk to Beatrice.. Obviously it is eventually revealed that this is a front, however I found it extremely funny to see the description and emphasis he went in trying to cover up his love. Benedick’s over the top attitude and witty behavior made him a hilarious protagonist, and I constantly found myself enjoying his crafty remarks and ongoing humour.

Going hand in hand with Benedick(literally) is his sassy counterpart Beatrice. Throughout the play, Beatrice proves to be a FOIL of her friend Hero. Hero is always shown as quiet and respectful, whereas Beatrice is sarcastic, bordering on mean with her comments. Like Benidick, Beatrice swears of marriage, having an early idea of feminism and women’s rights, thinking that a women should not be married to anyone she does not love. Beatrice is a fiercely loyal friend, and when she hears the rumours that Claudio cheated on Hero, she berates him, using his actions as an example as to why women should be equals. As a whole, Benedick and Beatrice fit together perfectly. Based on the constant battle of remarks they share, I assume that they have a romantic history, and it is likely that Benedick led her on. However, after trying to beat the other in every aspect of life, their love is known by each other, and they reconcile. These two characters are characterized by their actions, and how others act towards them. They do not get the luxury held by authors who can write paragraphs of description, and Shakespeare provides detailed, remarkable scenes in order to characterize the future couple.

Much Ado About Foreshadowing

Hinting at the future. Foreshadowing. This literary device is used in many ways in many novels, and Much Ado About Nothing by the great William Shakespeare is no different. ,Much Ado About Nothing is a romantic comedy, with much of the humour coming from the swearing off of love. In the early stag es of the play, a group of men arrive at the castle of Leonato. The conversations that follow are, in my mind, some of the most humourous in the play. Now, for anyone who has seen a movie, it is obvious when two characters are destined to fall in love. The relationship between Beatrice and Benedick starts as if they were eight; insulting each other to hide their true feelings. This is seen through immediately by the audience, as no juvenile teasing could be taken as anything other than deep flirting. The humour in this section comes not only from the childlike playing of the characters, but also by the resolvement of each character to never marry. Benedick is quite vocal about his ideas, stating that  “I may go the finer, I will live a bachelor.”(21). As someone who enjoys watching plays, I searched for a visual form of this work, and I found that the actors who portrayed the role of Benedick said these lines with enough sarcasm that a newborn would understand the true intentions of Shakespeare. It is clear that Beatrice and Bendick have a history of insulting and teasing each other- it’s all that's seen in the first scene! Within reading the first few lines of the script I knew that these two characters would fall in love, and spent the remainder of the play rooting for the foreshadowing of romance between the flirtatious characters to come true.

Reaching the End of the Road

Throughout The Road  our characters faced many challenges. They were attacked, almost trapped by cannibals, and starving(all the time). It never seemed like they had any chance at survival; it looked as if they were doomed to die… Until the end. For me, the ending of the novel was unfitting, and it did not sit well after reading.

One of the recurring ideas McCarthy seemed to show was the hopelessness of the father and son’s situation. They were never ‘ahead’ in life, with food and ammunition always running low. It seemed to me like the novel would end in their inevitable demise. This idea was reinforced in my mind until the very end, with the tragic death of the father.

The father’s death seemed a little weak. After seeing his survival skills I would have expected him to go down with style, protecting his son and killing enemies right and left, however he simply got sick and died. It was almost as if McCarthy was showing the irony of life; one can be strong, but there's always something that can beat them. For the father, he was ready to fight off many enemies, but he could not stop the sickness. This seemed like the ending I was expecting, the father reaches his death, tells the son to go onwards until the same type of demise occurs, however my hypothesis was destroyed pages later.

After watching his father, protector, and friend die, the boy is left with what little supplies they had, and the knowledge he had gained. He sets off to continue to survive… and immediately finds the ‘good guys’. Within walking distance of his father’s grave, he has found company to join with in order to survive. I understand what McCarthy was attempting; he wanted to add the glimpse of hope into the future of the boy, however I feel as if it came too late. It seemed like an ending that was too nice for the story. Watching the duo escape cannibals, and walk through a consistently grey environment seemed like a depressing tale that wanted a depressing ending, however that wasn’t what was given. The end was opposite everything that was shown prior in the novel.

Had I been writing the novel, I would have cut the last few pages off. I would have ended after the passing of the pistol, an item integral to the father and son’s adventure and survival. At that point I think McCarthy would have established the transition of the boy, who was about to set off alone, as well as leaving the idea of inevitable death intact. I understand why McCarthy ended his novel the way he did; to provide a little light, however that light was unnecessary on the grey path of The Road.