Abstract This paper introduces, discusses, and analyzes the plays "King Lear" and "A Midsummer Night's Dream" by William Shakespeare. Specifically it compares and contrasts the character of "Puck," the mischievous fairy, with "Fool," King Lear's professional court jester. The author argues that although both are minor characters in the plays, they are quite important to the overall impact and import of the works.
From the Paper "Puck, whose real name is Robin Goodfellow, plays the jester to his fairy king in "A Midsummer Night's Dream." He is the head fairy in this delightful work, and some critics call him the central character or the most important part in the play. Much of the play's action revolves around him or something he has done. He is comical, infuriating, and is part of the reason this play is so magical and still popular today. The "Fool" is also a jester but he is a more serious type of character, who often chides Lear or guides him with his seemingly nonsensical words, such as, "The codpiece that will house / Before the head has any, / The head and he shall louse; / So beggars marry many. / The man that makes his toe / What he his heart should make, / Shall of a corn cry woe, / And turn his sleep to wake" ("Lear," 1993, 3.2.25-32). Fool actually speaks wisely but clouds his wise words with nonsense. Puck, in contrast, is often nonsensical and witty. His part plays for laughs, while Fool may gain laughter but his real purpose is to advise and influence his king. In addition, Fool is hired for his jesting and advice, while Puck serves freely and without pay or responsibility."
Tags:Puck, Fool, William, Shakespeare, A, Midsummer, Night's, Dream, King, Lear
Abstract This paper reviews the role of the fool in the play 'King Lear' by William Shakespeare. According to this paper, the fool is not only the vehicle of comic relief, but also delivers an important philosophical and political message.
From the Paper "FOOL [fool] or court jester, is a person who entertains with buffoonery and an often caustic wit (FOOL). The Fool appears often in Shakespeare's work, but nowhere is it more notable than in King Lear. For some, the character merely offers a sort of comic relief from Lear's increasingly tragic existence ("Comic Relief in King Lear"), while other critics see the Fool as an important philosophical and political statement (Bate). [King Lear] moves from a theoretical and philosophical inquiry into deep causes to a practical faith in the surface of human actions and a trust in the wisdom to be gained from immediate experience" (Bate). In addition to the debates surrounding the role of the Fool in King Lear, critics are unsure of which character the Fool is most closely connected (Bate)."
Abstract This essay compares two case studies, one on the Chemplus (B) firm, and one on Puck Stop, an informal group formed to win a trivia championship at a local bar. The paper compares the case studies and uses the text provided to show the problems in communication, their relation to perceptions, and how this ultimately resulted in behavioral dysfunctions and a failure to achieve their goals.
From the Paper "In both the Chemplus (B) and Puck Stop cases, communications problems and allow behavioral dysfunctions to deepen. Underlying feelings of inequity, basic human behavioral natures, take center stage and hinder the performance of the groups involved. Similarities in communications problems exist despite each group having quite a different organizational structure. Chemplus is a formal corporate organization with a division of labor and a hierarchy of authority. Harry Barlow is a manager who appears to manage with a wide span of control. The Puck Stop case has an informal association of people organized into a group by Puck Stop patrons Hannah Kurtzmann and Mike Colangelo."
Abstract This paper examines how Puck's character is instrumental to the success of "A Midsummer Nights Dream" and how Puck is the device that turns a play that could have been a tragedy into a comedy. It discusses how Puck plays the role of curator navigating us through the tricky parts of the play and how he controls the action in the woods near Athens, by using magical powers, mischievous spells and by purposely disobeying the orders of Oberon.
From the Paper "Puck, having received his orders from Oberon begins to set the plan in motion, but Puck the practical trickster adds his own magical spice to the orders he had received. After Oberon told Puck to anoint the man in Athenian clothing Oberon leaves the floor open for Puck to make a blunder of the situation. When Puck states, "Through the forest have I gone, But Athenian found I none..." it seems that Puck is getting aggravated by not finding the man, and in his haste he anoints the eyes of Lysander instead and actually sets the plot of the play in motion. When Puck sees Lysander lying on the ground he automatically assumes that it is the right man but it is not."
Abstract The Fool in William Shakespeare's "King Lear" is often mistaken as foolhardy, but everything he says has a deeper significance and greater truth. Since he is the court jester, the audience assumes that the Fool's main purpose is to entertain us. The paper shows that the Fool's dramatic function is not to humor us, but to tell King Lear the truth through his metaphoric rhymes and jests. The Fool is a representation of King Lear's psyche. The paper explains that when the Fool disappears after Act III, scene ii, what is left of King Lear's stable mentality quickly disintegrates. The relationship between King Lear is not one of master and servant. The Fool could be considered King Lear's subconscious; he has perceptions the King Lear does not. With his knowledge, the Fool tries to teach King Lear how to reason out the truth for himself.
From the Paper "The Fool states that King Lear was wise in a time when he did not need it as he doe now. King Lear was a wise King but when his wisdom was greatly needed he did not apply his knowledge. The Fool states that he is merely a Fool, but he would rather be a Fool than a befallen King. He strives to inform Lear of how adverse his situation is, but King Lear still does not fully comprehend the Fool's metaphors. Before King Lear decided to see his other daughter, Regan, the Fool warns King Lear that Regan's reception will be similar if not worse than Gonerils'."
Abstract This paper examines the Shakespearean character ?Puck? in the play ? A Midsummer Night's Dream.? It describes him as the head fairy and protagonist in the play and the reason this play is so magical. The paper describes the use of language in order to set apart the fairies from the "mortals".
From the Paper "'Spirits and fairies cannot be represented, they cannot even be painted, -- they can only be believed'" (Bloom 87). This could be the opening line of Shakespeare's ?A Midsummer Night's Dream,? for as we watch the play unfold, we are taken out of the world of today, and into a magical world full of romance, magic, and farce, and Puck is a major player in the story that unfolds."
Abstract This essay will analyze two case studies, "The John Highfield Company" and "Puck Stop," in order to examine their organizational structures in terms of leadership, communication, and motivation. It becomes evident that these three components must be enacted in different ways in the context of each respective case so as to ensure greater organizational achievement.
Abstract This paper looks briefly at the background of a fool/court jester in history and gives a brief history of King Lear. It looks closely at the Fool's character and his interactions with the other characters of the play, especially his relationship with Lear. The paper discusses the fool's function of comic relief, his function as the teller of Truth, and as Lear's conscience and reason.
From the Paper "The Fool in King Lear is often a misunderstood presence. In the late seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, shortened versions of the play omitted the character altogether. In Elizabethan times, the role of a fool, or court jester, was to professionally entertain others, specifically the king. Many of the fool's quips and riddles were made at the expense of the king, and this is depicted in King Lear. In Act 1, Scene 4 Goneril refers to the Fool as ""all-licensed fool""(1.4.191), highlighting the fact that because fools hold a special license they are allowed to say things to their superiors that anybody else would be punished for. When the Fool tells Lear what he thinks of him, Lear threatens him with the whip if he goes too far: The Fool in King Lear is often a misunderstood presence. In the late seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, shortened versions of the play omitted the character altogether. In Elizabethan times, the role of a fool, or court jester, was to professionally entertain others, specifically the king. Many of the fool's quips and riddles were made at the expense of the king, and this is depicted in King Lear. In Act 1, Scene 4 Goneril refers to the Fool as ""all-licensed fool""(1.4.191), highlighting the fact that because fools hold a special license they are allowed to say things to their superiors that anybody else would be punished for. When the Fool tells Lear what he thinks of him, Lear threatens him with the whip if he goes too far."
Abstract The paper examines how "King Lear" is an epic tragedy, which has been passed down through generations as a masterpiece. It looks at how the mastery does not lay in the character of the work's anti-hero, but in the lowliest servant in the kingdom, the King's fool. It evaluates how because the tragedy is so thick, the fool is needed to provide the leverage the audience needs in order to still obtain a lesson. It analyzes how the fool never ceases to be obvious and blunt with the King and how he is the only one who can do this without being offensive.
From the Paper "When discussing how well The Fool aided the King in both the realization and potential correction of his mistakes, we must see the final product of his work throughout the play, which is solely the task of opening his master's eyes in hopes of changing his behavior. Of course, how much could Lear have rerouted his inheritance through a more sensible direction, such as giving his land all to the daughter who loved him most, Cordelia, so as not to break up the kingdom, once the initial damage was done? This would have been nearly impossible to wholly correct, and is what makes the play a sure tragedy. It can be seen how effective The Fool was by his final sightings in Act III, scenes ii, iv, and vii, because as the play proceeds, more and more of his character, and Lear's character are shown, it is just like getting to know a friend, who at first may seem like a simple person to figure out, but who in reality has several layers of depth."
Abstract The parallel stories of Lear's and Gloucester's sufferings at the hands of their own children reflect anxieties that would have been close to home for Shakespeare's audience. This paper explains that many of William Shakespeare's plays feature a clown of some sort, and "King Lear" arguably has two such clowns: the Fool himself and Edgar in his later disguise as Tom O'Bedlam. This essay focuses on the character of the Fool in the play, and how he can be compared to Cordelia. The author of the paper considers the contribution he makes to the play and his importance to the play as a whole in terms of the influence he has over events and other characters. The paper concludes that "King Lear" would not be the same without the character of Fool.
From the Paper "The word 'pined' again makes the Fool sound like a dog or puppy and suggests that there is some sort of connection between Cordelia and the Fool. They are linked in the text emotionally not only because the Fool is clearly upset when Cordelia is banished, but also because they are closest to Lear and loved most by him. It is noticeable that Cordelia and the Fool do not appear on stage at the same time at any point in the play."
Abstract This paper discusses that the romantic comedy "Fools Rush In" and the drama "Love Story" both present a society in which social differences can be overcome by love, part of the American Dream. The paper explains that "Love Story" is a tragic story about the marriage of two young people, which also delves into the relationship each has with their father. The author feels that "Fools Rush In" is not a very good film, too given to stereotypes to be more than a frilly comedy.
Table of Contents
Introduction
Background
Arguments
Conclusion
From the Paper "The couples in these two films are drawn quite differently, though in both cases the male has a family seen as too stiff and soulless to allow for change, while the female has a family that is earthy, real, and open to change. This is less evident in "Fools Rush In" given that the girl's family also opposes this marriage and sees one element of the American Dream to be being left to live in a social and cultural enclave with your own kind, which is not that different from the way the WASP parents view what they want. The American Dream in "Love Story" is too widely accepted to be one specific thing. It is also too easy to achieve, with differences between ethnic groups being minimal when all are at least White if not of the same religion or background."
Abstract This paper examines the concept of how "character determines conduct", or how the personal qualities of the individual is reflected through their behavior. The text used to demonstrate this theme is Shakespeare's "King Lear", where the characters of Lear and the Fool are analyzed.
Abstract This paper will discuss the book "Ship of Fools" by Katherine Porter, and seek to understand it main objectives in the way that it conveys meaning to the reader. By understanding this old story, in the format of a Texan point of view, we can see the author's native application to an old story coming through in the tale. The characters have different names, but ideas of travel are the no different in this version of the story.
Abstract This paper will discuss the word 'fool' in the plays of William Shakespeare, and seek to understand what the meanings of this are in this type of literature. By understanding the way that the word is used, we can see why Shakespeare used it, and how it pertained to the subjects it was used by, and how the historical aspects of the period influenced it usage.
Abstract This paper analyzes the social comparison theory in four sections, first by exploring a journal article that explored the theory in the United States and China. The paper also analyzes a mass media example in the context of social comparison. A personal example is then provided within an academic setting to see how the real life-scenario works. Finally, the theory was examined in an ethical context.
Outline:
Abstract
Social Comparison, Individualism-Collectivism, and Self-Esteem in China and the United States by Chung and Mallery
Mass Media Example of the Social Comparison Theory
Personal Example of Social Comparison Theory
Social Comparison Theory and Ethics
From the Paper "Chung and Mallery (1999) "examined the possible differences in social comparison between individualistic and collectivistic cultures" using the United States and China for the sample (para. 1). Chung and Mallery predicted that based on past research, collectivistic cultures, where individuals focused on achievements that would be beneficial to a collective group rather than themselves, would be positively correlated with upward social comparison, while the contrary would be true for individualistic cultures. In essence the a priori expectation is that "upward comparisons were positively correlated with individual self-esteem, and downward comparisons were negatively correlated with collective self-esteem" (Chung & Mallery, 1999, para 14)."
