Shakespeare’s Comedy And Tragedy Then And Now
Literary scholars revere Shakespeare for his massive contribution to the sphere of literature. Out of many of his compositions, comical and tragic tales stand out for sensitizing audiences on diverse themes. Although scholars are uncertain about the exact date of the compositions, the intellects infer to the stories in contemporary studies. Moreover, comical plays can serve interchangeably as a tragedy through alteration of minor aspects of the play. As noted, hundreds of years have elapsed since the production of the contents of plays like Romeo and Juliet, Much Ado about Nothing, Merchant of Venice, Macbeth, and Hamlet, but similarity still manifests in diverse aspects of composition. According to the relay of the play, the artists involved in acts that convey the tales maintain the theme, style, and language of the presentation. Differences only manifest in the choice of characters, media for portrayal, and the duration of the plays. In this discussion, the focus is on the similarity and differences in the tragedy and comedy of the past and contemporary production. The objective is to highlight the advances in the presentation of William Shakespeare’s creation.
An examination of the history of the accounts of the comedy and tragedy by Shakespeare indicates that a combination of social factors influenced the selection of the stories that conveyed diverse themes. Just as the case in the present, the characters featuring in the comical tales sought to create a connection with the audiences before expressing the theme of communication (Worthen 2). The narration approach facilitated the dissemination of messages on the subject of love and morality, among many other political and social issues dominating the discussions era of the presentation. The flexibility of the tales of the past equally provided the opportunity for directors and actors showcasing the contents to interchange the comedy into tragedy and vice versa. A story that qualifies as comedy such as much ado about nothing could easily translate to tragedy based on the tactics exploited in storytelling. As a result, the tales fitted definition as a comedy as well as tragedy since the outcome depended on the aspects of the presentation. Just as the case today, the defining characteristic of most of the plays of the past like the use of old English.
The subsequent aspect of similarity of the plays of past and present is the incorporation of humor to arouse the emotive senses of the audience. Theatres directors designed the plays by engaging a character capable of expressing the emotive senses. The personalities of the character equally reflected the imagination of the creator of the contents. Shakespeare engaged persons representing the typical traits dominating the society in the era of presentation. The same has dominated composition produced in subsequent decades post the production of the contents. The artists of the era refining Shakespeare’s play have maintained focus on political themes. However, differences have manifested in the physical outlook of the characters. For instance, the play of Romeo and Juliet engaged personality dressed in clothing, reflecting the prevalent cultures of the period. The same applies to the composition of the present (Bevington 5). Artists engage personality representing some aspects of the modern ordeal. A case in point is a young male character acting as Romeo in the play. The contemporary artists engage the person with the intention of maintaining the objective of the story blending the tales with aspects of modernity.
The third area of comparison of the comedy and the tragedy of the past and the present is the choice of the media for communication. In the past, artists used traditional theatre in the conveyance of the messages. The performances took place in large facilities just as the case at present. However, difference manifests in the outlook of the facilities hosting comedy and tragedy (Dunton-Downer, Alan, and Victoria 15). The modern-day theatre for comedy has incorporated advanced equipment like the sounding and lighting that helped in the relay of the messages of the play. In the past, performances took place in traditional theatres dotted with old furniture. The facilities relied on traditional equipment, and the performers communicated directly to the audience without the assistance of sound equipment. The same applied to light in the presentation of tragic stories. The light from natural sources facilitated the projection of the images of the characters on stage during performances.
Additionally, the themes of presentation in tragedy and comedy sought to enlighten the audiences about social issues affecting the population. The tales focused on the prevailing concerned that ranged from sexuality to betrayal to morality. The similarity in the play of the period with contemporary production was manifest in the mode of storytelling (Hart 176). The communicators focused on the theme of presentation throughout the play. The approach applies in contemporary. Performers equally express emotions in the communication just as the case in the 1600s in the era of the first performances of Shakespeare’s plays. In terms of differences, contemporary artists adjust some aspects of the presentation to exaggerate the meaning of the composition. A case in point is lengthening the production by including ideas l that augments the meaning of the presentation. An observation of the performance Macbeth indicates variation in the approach to the presentation from the composition of the seventieth era. The feminist aspects are suppressed in the tales.