|
|
 |
 |
 |
| Thursday, 15 July 2004 |
 |
|
 |
Features | |
| News Business Features Editorial Security Politics World Letters Sports Obituaries
|
Why Shakespeare downplayed Julius Caesar The World of arts by Gwen Herat
He needed to showcase Brutus in good light to satisfy his thirst and address the downfall of Caesar to use his selected dialogue. Shakespeare was not concerned in elevating any particular character and use them as a platform to render some of the excellent dialogue scripted by him in this historical tragedy. Every character had spectacular delivery put on his lips that jolted out of the pages like thunder before a crashing storm. Less subdued and mostly volatile and Shakespeare put the gentler ones on the lips of the mighty Caesar. The very man who lent his name to the play, played but a small character compared to Brutus and the rest. Was he the real Caesar we knew from history or a myth created by the Bard on lines of the then popular book titled 'Lives of the Noble Grecians and Romans' by Plutarch written in Latin and translated into English by Sir Thomas North.
We also know that Shakespeare had read Latin but had no time to review this book so that he familiarises Caesar. He was best with heavy schedules, writing almost three plays a year, acting in the theatre as well as directing and managing the theatre. Sir Thomas' book came as a blessing to him and used the contents as the base to write Julius Caesar. It contained all what Shakespeare needed which described the nature and feelings of Roman heroes and he used these characteristics in the play. By now he had the Roman setting that told him the story of this great Roman General who was later assassinated at the height of his power by his friends who were the Senators. They feared that Caesar had become too powerful and wished to put an end to his ambition of becoming the Emperor of Rome. Why, in a context like this Shakespeare made him a coward or weakling in the hands of Brutus and elected Mark Anthony to render one of the most quoted and popular epitaphs we heard, is yet to be ratified by scholars. Shakespeare rarely made up his own stories for plays. He borrowed them from other writers and Caesar was no different. But Shakespeare was wiser in this instant. He played into history not by his own wish and tested the pulse of the audience of the day. They in turn, wished for good stories but with murder, bloodbath as well as battles. In re-telling the story of Julius Caesar, the Bard rolled all these into one play knowing its appeal even for the discerning. The play was a great success in the new theatre and remained the best play of the season. Written in 1599 and probably early in the year because it is recorded that some academics along with a Swiss doctor had seen the play being performed along with 15 characters but the record does not say that Shakespeare himself acted in it. The splendid new Globe Theatre built on the south bank of river Thames, had been just opened and Caesar was among the first plays to have gone on board. We also know that Shakespeare, later, became a co-owner of the Globe. Shakespeare was a good story teller, not simply addressing a story but would point out that good cannot come out of evil and revealed how a good and noble man like Brutus could decide to do wrong for the best of reasons. This may have been the reason that he was upstaged by the Bard that inevitably led to chaos, civil war and his own death. Brutus believed he was right and failed to see his mistake. Always at pain to point out that evil at treason, he relied at a time that monarchs lived in fear of treason we see so clearly in Julius Caesar. To the English of his time, the play would have reminiscenced the conspiracies against their own Queen Elizabeth I and of Mary Queen of Scots who tried to seize the English throne and failed. Yet another incident took place at that time when the play was performed at the Globe. Earl of Essex, Queen Elizabeth's trusted favourite, was accused of rebelling against her and the audience was aware that had Essex succeeded, he would have plunged the country to civil war just like the noble Brutus. No doubt the key characters were Brutus and Cassius but we also see Mark Antony emerging in defiance against the conspirators. Brutus dismisses him as 'a limb of Caesar'. In his opinion, Antony was a frivolous and immature man until he seized the opportunity to turn tables on Brutus. He reveals himself as clever and cunning especially when he addresses the Romans. Antony is seen as a dual character. As much as he loved Caesar and denounced the conspirators and unlike Brutus, his motive were not pure. He wanted power for himself as much as he wanted justice for Caesar's death. So, we see Shakespeare in different roles. At some point Brutus is the hero and then trails behind Antony to pull the rug from under his feet. There is also Cassius, not much of a good senator but more appealing to the people than Brutus who ignores the battles he talk about. Cassius is more humane than Brutus which we realise towards the end of the play.... and Caesar describes him. '.... he loves no plays, Shakespeare paid very little tribute to female characters but he identified Brutus's wife, Portia as a gentle dignified woman of bearing. Cato, her father was a famous Roman Statesman and educated her. She gave ear to the affairs of the State and when Brutus takes her into confidence and reveal the conspiracy, Portia despairs. She is cast as the sensitive woman who fail to get the better of herself with enemies and commits suicide rather than face dishonour. 'A woman well-reputed, Cato's daughter, ###### Snow, the secret of Mona Lisa's smile The enigmatic smile of the Mona Lisa lies in a quirk of our brain which interprets 'visual noise', the equivalent of the white flecks called snow which occur on a badly-tuned TV set, a pair of scientists say.
They showed the results to 12 volunteers, who were asked to gauge Mona Lisa's expression on a scale on one to four - sad, slightly sad, slightly happy and happy. As would be expected, 'noise' that lifted the edges of her lips made her look happier, and 'noise' that flattened her lips made her seem sadder, the British weekly New Scientist reports in next Saturday's issue. But what was more surprising was how the flecked patterns made people change their perception of the expression as they viewed the picture. Why this is so appears to be rooted in the way the brain interprets the sketchy and sometimes interrupted flow of light signals which is visual noise. It means that when many people see the Mona Lisa, they believe her expression is subtly changing, the scientists believe. "That may be part of what makes the paintings so powerful," Tyler told New Scientist. Visual noise is a major but poorly understood part of the daily input into our minds. Tyler believes it to have many sources, including fluctuations in the number of photons hitting light receptors in the retina and randomness in the firing of neurons which carry the visual signals to the brain. The research is published in a specialist journal, Vision Research.
Tyler's and Kontsevich's previous experiments in this field can be
accessed at (http://www.ski.org/CWTylerfilab/CWTyler/PrePublications/ The Mona Lisa, painted by Leonardo da Vinci from 1503-1506, hangs in Paris' Louvre Museum. In April, curators said scientists would be closely examining the legendary work for signs of apparent warping of the thin panel of popular wood on which it was painted. Some experts claim Mona Lisa is actually a self-portrait of Leonardo himself, or an adolescent boy. X-ray examination shows three earlier versions hidden beneath the final painting. (AFP) ###### Everything but...' (the kitchen sink)
An exhibition of innovative and witty contemporary kitchenware, organised by the British Council alongside more traditional ceramic pieces designed by established UK potters will be on display at the Barefoot Gallery from July 15 to August 1, 2004. The exhibition will be opened to the public on weekdays and Saturdays from 10.00 a.m. to 7.00 p.m. and on Sundays from 11.00 a.m. to 4.00 p.m. Apart from the exhibition, British
Council will also host a talk conducted by one of the designers of the exhibition itself. Andrew Tanner a well-known name in the ceramics and pottery industry in the UK has worked very closely with many of the designers of the exhibition. His talk along with his slide presentation will provide the audience an overall understanding and overview of the ceramics and pottery industry in the UK. The talk will be held at the Barefoot Gallery on Saturday 24 July at 4.00 p.m. and will be opened to the public on a first come first served basis.
Although appears to be a mere exhibition of kitchenware, there is a good deal of humour incorporated into some of the exhibits displayed. For instance, a young design group have cleverly transformed snooker balls into salt and pepper containers whilst another designer has 're-invented' a mundane object - the cat bowl, made not with functional plastic, but with classic bone china. The exhibition will feature exhibits of over 25 UK designers. For further details contact the British Council Arts office on 4521538 or 4521542. |
|
News | Business | Features
| Editorial | Security
Produced by Lake House |
Christopher Tyler and Leonid Kontsevich of the Smith-Kettlewell Eye
Research Institute in San Francisco digitally manipulated an image of the
painting, overlaying it with a greyish filter of random flecks.
