The Development of the Relationship between Petruchio and Ka by Kane Harris on Prezi
Petruchio. Verona, for a while I take my leave, To see my friends in Padua; but of all. My best . But for my daughter Katherine, this I know, She is not for .. Such a mad marriage never was before. .. Widow. Then never trust me if I be afeard. -Patrick in the modern movie adaptation of the play (10 Things I Hate About You) is new to the school and somewhat of an outcast, and agrees. During “Taming of the Shrew”, Petruchio and Katherine are emotionally unfaithful By Petruchio already having these ill intentions for a relationship that had not including trust issues like those of Katherine and Petruchio's.
Yet Shrew is remarkably popular with audiences: Either theatre-goers are secret sadists, who like nothing better than watching a spot of wife-bashing, or there's more to Shrew than meets the eye.
Over the past two decades, productions have divided into two camps. On one side, performances emphasise the brutality of Kate and Petruchio's relationship. In this interpretation, Shrew can be considered, in director Edward Hall's words, "theatre of cruelty".
His all-male production inhe says, "followed the text through to its bitterest conclusion. Look at what Shakespeare has written: Kate is starved of sleep, beaten, refused food. Hall doesn't think Shakespeare was being misogynistic in portraying female subjugation, but questioning the values of society. What if, as a human being, she doesn't want to roll over, as was expected in Shakespeare's day?
I actually think he's championing the woman's rights. Lucy Baileywho is directing the new RSC show, believes their attraction is instant, and what unfolds is "all foreplay to one event, which is to get these two people into bed".
For this to work, Bailey says, Petruchio must never appear to be superior to Kate.
It becomes punitive, and you start to think, 'This is dead and ghastly. By comparing seven passages which are similar in both plays, he concluded "the original conception is invariably to be found" in The Shrew. He reached this conclusion primarily because A Shrew features numerous lines almost identical to lines in Marlowe's Tamburlaine and Dr. Instead he labelled A Shrew a bad quarto. His main argument was that, primarily in the subplot of A Shrew, characters act without motivation, whereas such motivation is present in The Shrew.
Alexander believed this represents an example of a "reporter" forgetting details and becoming confused, which also explains why lines from other plays are used from time to time; to cover gaps which the reporter knows have been left.
Chamberswho reasserted the source theory. Its textual relation to The Shrew does not bear any analogy to that of other 'bad Quartos' to the legitimate texts from which they were memorised. The nomenclaturewhich at least a memoriser can recall, is entirely different. The verbal parallels are limited to stray phrases, most frequent in the main plot, for which I believe Shakespeare picked them up from A Shrew.
InLeo Kirschbaum made a similar argument. In an article listing over twenty examples of bad quartos, Kirschbaum did not include A Shrew, which he felt was too different from The Shrew to come under the bad quarto banner; "despite protestations to the contrary, The Taming of a Shrew does not stand in relation to The Shrew as The True Tragedie, for example, stands in relation to 3 Henry VI.
Alexander's theory continued to be challenged as the years went on. Houk developed what came to be dubbed the Ur-Shrew theory; both A Shrew and The Shrew were based upon a third play, now lost. Duthie refined Houk's suggestion by arguing A Shrew was a memorial reconstruction of Ur-Shrew, a now lost early draft of The Shrew; "A Shrew is substantially a memorially constructed text and is dependent upon an early Shrew play, now lost.
The Shrew is a reworking of this lost play. Duthie argues this other version was a Shakespearean early draft of The Shrew; A Shrew constitutes a reported text of a now lost early draft. In particular, he concentrated on the various complications and inconsistencies in the subplot of A Shrew, which had been used by Houk and Duthie as evidence for an Ur-Shrew, to argue that the reporter of A Shrew attempted to recreate the complex subplot from The Shrew but got confused; "the compiler of A Shrew while trying to follow the subplot of The Shrew gave it up as too complicated to reproduce, and fell back on love scenes in which he substituted for the maneuvers of the disguised Lucentio and Hortensio extracts from Tamburlaine and Faustus, with which the lovers woo their ladies.
Morris summarised the scholarly position in as one in which no clear-cut answers could be found; "unless new, external evidence comes to light, the relationship between The Shrew and A Shrew can never be decided beyond a peradventure. It will always be a balance of probabilities, shifting as new arguments and opinions are added to the scales. Nevertheless, in the present century, the movement has unquestionably been towards an acceptance of the Bad Quarto theory, and this can now be accepted as at least the current orthodoxy.
The Early Quartos series. Miller agrees with most modern scholars that A Shrew is derived from The Shrew, but he does not believe it to be a bad quarto. Instead, he argues it is an adaptation by someone other than Shakespeare. In The Shrew, after the wedding, Gremio expresses doubts as to whether or not Petruchio will be able to tame Katherina. As Gremio does have a counterpart in I Suppositi, Miller concludes that "to argue the priority of A Shrew in this case would mean arguing that Shakespeare took the negative hints from the speeches of Polidor and Phylema and gave them to a character he resurrected from Supposes.
This is a less economical argument than to suggest that the compiler of A Shrew, dismissing Gremio, simply shared his doubts among the characters available. For him, adaptation includes exact quotation, imitation and incorporation of his own additions. This seems to define his personal style, and his aim seems to be to produce his own version, presumably intended that it should be tuned more towards the popular era than The Shrew. He points out that the subplot in The Shrew is based on "the classical style of Latin comedy with an intricate plot involving deception, often kept in motion by a comic servant.
He points to the fact that in The Shrew, there is only eleven lines of romance between Lucentio and Bianca, but in A Shrew, there is an entire scene between Kate's two sisters and their lovers. This, he argues, is evidence of an adaptation rather than a faulty report; while it is difficult to know the motivation of the adapter, we can reckon that from his point of view an early staging of The Shrew might have revealed an overly wrought play from a writer trying to establish himself but challenging too far the current ideas of popular comedy.
The Shrew is long and complicated. It has three plots, the subplots being in the swift Latin or Italianate style with several disguises. Its language is at first stuffed with difficult Italian quotations, but its dialogue must often sound plain when compared to Marlowe's thunder or Greene's romance, the mouth-filling lines and images that on other afternoons were drawing crowds.
An adapter might well have seen his role as that of a 'play doctor' improving The Shrew — while cutting it — by stuffing it with the sort of material currently in demand in popular romantic comedies. Oliver argues the version of the play in the First Folio was likely copied not from a prompt book or transcript, but from the author's own foul paperswhich he believes showed signs of revision by Shakespeare. When Shakespeare rewrote the play so that Hortensio became a suitor in disguise Litiomany of his lines were either omitted or given to Tranio disguised as Lucentio.
Along Came Deception — Science Leadership Academy @ Center City
For example, in Act 2, Scene 1, Tranio as Lucentio and Gremio bid for Bianca, but Hortensio, who everyone is aware is also a suitor, is never mentioned. In Act 3, Scene 2, Tranio suddenly becomes an old friend of Petruchio, knowing his mannerisms and explaining his tardiness prior to the wedding. However, up to this point, Petruchio's only acquaintance in Padua has been Hortensio.
However, as far as Hortensio should be concerned, Lucentio has denounced Bianca, because in Act 4, Scene 2, Tranio disguised as Lucentio agreed with Hortensio that neither of them would pursue Bianca, and as such, his knowledge of the marriage of who he supposes to be Lucentio and Bianca makes no sense.
From this, Oliver concludes that an original version of the play existed in which Hortensio was simply a friend of Petruchio's, and had no involvement in the Bianca subplot, but wishing to complicate things, Shakespeare rewrote the play, introducing the Litio disguise, and giving some of Hortensio's discarded lines to Tranio, but not fully correcting everything to fit the presence of a new suitor.
Upon returning to London, they published A Shrew insome time after which Shakespeare rewrote his original play into the form seen in the First Folio. Controversy[ edit ] Kevin Black in his "wedding outfit" in the Carmel Shakespeare Festival production. The Taming of the Shrew has been the subject of critical controversy. Dana Aspinall writes "Since its first appearance, some time between andShrew has elicited a panoply of heartily supportive, ethically uneasy, or altogether disgusted responses to its rough-and-tumble treatment of the 'taming' of the 'curst shrew' Katherina, and obviously, of all potentially unruly wives.
Do we simply add our voices to those of critical disapproval, seeing Shrew as at best an 'early Shakespeare', the socially provocative effort of a dramatist who was learning to flex his muscles?
Or as an item of social archaeology that we have long ago abandoned? Or do we 'rescue' it from offensive male smugness? Or make an appeal to the slippery category of ' irony '? Hibbard argues that during the period in which the play was written, arranged marriages were beginning to give way to newer, more romantically informed unions, and thus people's views on women's position in society, and their relationships with men, were in a state of flux.
As such, audiences may not have been as predisposed to tolerate the harsh treatment of Katherina as is often thought. In a mirror of the original, his new wife attempts successfully to tame him — thus the tamer becomes the tamed. Although Fletcher's sequel is often downplayed as merely a farce, some critics acknowledge the more serious implications of such a reaction.
Lynda Boose, for example, writes, "Fletcher's response may in itself reflect the kind of discomfort that Shrew has characteristically provoked in men and why its many revisions since have repeatedly contrived ways of softening the edges.
For some critics, "Kate's taming was no longer as funny as it had been [ Marcus very much believes the play to be what it seems. She argues A Shrew is an earlier version of The Shrew, but acknowledges that most scholars reject the idea that A Shrew was written by Shakespeare. She believes one of the reasons for this is because A Shrew "hedges the play's patriarchal message with numerous qualifiers that do not exist in" The Shrew. For example, director Conall Morrisonwrote in Thou'dst thank me but a little for my counsel and yet I'll promise thee shall be rich.
He is given the thought of marrying Katherine, a rich but unwanted young lady. By Petruchio already having these ill intentions for a relationship that had not begun yet, he set their relationship up for failure. By the time that relationship started, it was already destined to fail fail because Petruchio was deceitful towards Katherine by engaging in a relationship with her for her money and only for her money.
In this scene, Reuben has left his wife, Lisa, on the beach to go scuba diving with an instructor. When he comes back to find her, unfortunately, he finds her involved in intercourse with the instructor. Lisa fails to admit to her husband what she wants out of the relationship. She also fails to admit to her husband, on their wedding daythat he is not the man she is truly in love with.
Because if she were to be truthful with Reuben, she would have acknowledged and admitted that he was not the man she wanted to spend the rest of her life with.
Shakespeare In Action
Not only did Lisa hurt Reuben and deceive him by stepping outside of their marriage, she was so reckless that she allowed Reuben to catch her in the act. By deceiving Reuben in the very beginning of their marriage, she pushed him to carry these same relationship tools onto his next romance.
Such duty as the subject owes the prince, even such a women oweth to her husband. Her character is sought out to be so evil that she it seems just a little awkward that she becomes so submissive towards her husband, Petruchio.