Liveblogging Shakespeare: Troilus and Cressida

Dramatis Personae: I can't help but wonder if Shakespeare hasn't taken a liberty, setting the story in Hector and Paris' time. Researching . . . nope. Funny, it seems from Chaucer that it was set earlier. Researching . . .again, I am mistaken. Somehow this is comforting, for now I have a nice little context for the play.

Prologue: an interesting and appropriate choice to give the play a Greek chorus, ala Henry V.

P.10 Appropriate that this line about Paris, a pederast in some versions, ends in a female rhyme. this trick is common in pentametric verse, and Shakespeare does it elsewhere, notably in the notorious Sonnet 20. It is reasonable to assume that the trick is here purposeful, but the question arises in my mind, as it usually does when reading Shakespeare, "Do we give him to much credit?" Close reading of Shakespeare invariably reveals such tidbits, but on occassion they are so tenuous that one wonders if the reader/critic is not being a bit revisionist. Did Shakespeare really pay such attention to every syllable that we can attribute meaning to something this incidental? Does his intent even matter?

P.11 A perfect example. Does the truncation of this line, the tentativeness of it, have anything to do with the topic: Tenedos, or is it just the playwright's convenience? Does it matter?

P 15-19 If we attribute meaning to lines 10 and 11, we must not rest until these similarly irregular metrics are dissected. Yet, there is no apparent reason for it, other than that Shakespeare allowed himself some error.

P:22 A nice production option would be to steal Chaucer's conceit and have Troilus play the part of the prologue, seemingly narrating from heaven with a wise and understanding detachment.

P:29,30 a cute couplet. Stagecraft is war. Sometimes you are the victor and the play is a smash--you kill, in stage lingo. Sometimes not, and you die out there. Especially appropriate here, in light of T&C's status as one of Shakepeare's problem plays.

I.i.6-28 Already an example of Shakespeare's subtle and seemingly effortless characterization. Pandarus is characterized as earthy and practical, first by his concern with Troilus' armor, and later by his choice of metaphor. Not only that, the contrast between him and Troilus is established by the 6th line of the play; he speaks in prose, Troilus in verse.

I.i.33 Troilus is revealed to be other than a courtly lover here, for he is concerned with Cressidas orgasm.

I.i.42 a bit o foreshadowing here, in a pithy and aphoristic couplet.

I.i49 This early and off-handed mention of Cassandra feels like a master's smooth touch of exposition.

I.i.57-61 I just about threw up in my mouth here. Troilus is clearly being set up as a foolish and idealistic lover.

I.i.66 Shakespeare's experience as an actor is evident here. I can't imagine the actor's not taking a beat, so clear is the arc of the scene.

I.i.107 Is the "flood" in Shakepeare's version literal, as in most others, or figurastive. I only wonder because I know that Troilus does not drown in this version.

I.i.116-117 Again, the couplet holds a world of meaning. In some versions, Paris is Troilus mentor/lover. Troilus seeming contempt here, together with the line "gor'd with Menelaus horn" connotes, "Good. Let him get fucked for a change."

I.i.118 succesful characterization of Aeneas in one line. It could not be clearer that he is consumed with the game of war if Shakespeare had stretched this out for a page.

I can't believe that I spent that much time reading one scene. this is going to take forever, and cheap at that price.

I.ii.4 this line both sets up Hector as a foil to Troilus and touches on what may become a theme: patience. Every Shakespearean play has a word that unlocks its world, and this may be T&C's.

I.ii.7 While war is sport for Aeneas, it is "husbandry", marriage for Hector.

I.ii.17 I lost track for a moment and thought Cressida was playing the fool . . . she (as does Alexander) shifts to prose here.

I.ii.18 There is something in this characterization of Ajax; I can smell it.

I.ii the entire rest of the scene seems to be in prose. Does Cressida do so for her Uncle, who spoke thusly in the previous scene?

I.ii.244 The waiting for Troilus makes the audience (and Cressida) develop the same patience that he and Hector have want of.

I.ii.308 As if overpowering her Uncle's wit were not evidence enough of her canniness, here we have a couple more tokens. For one, she reverts back to verse for her monologue (Alexander never seems to have exited), and entirely of couplets at that, the first character in the play to do so. This shows not only her facility with language, but her clever tailoring of it to her audience. Of course, the content of her words is the real evidence of her mastery: it is she alone who has patience of all the characters revealed so far, and the wisdom to leverage it to maximum effect.

I.iii.1-8 I had to read this part four times. I wonder if Agamemnon's obscurity is part of his character.

I.iii.31-54 Nestor tries to match Agamemnon's tone, but his only trick seems to be substituting fancy words for simpler ones, especially nautical terms. On the surface, the speeches are analogous, but even his pentameter is inferior. He substitutes "Boreas" for "wind", "the strong-ribbed bark" for "boat", and "liquid mountains" for "waves", and that is the extent of his rhetoric. Not only is Agamemnon the source of the idea, but it is an idea, not a mere description. His smelted gold and winnowed chaff are poignant metaphors; Nestor just talks pretty.

I.iii.70-74 Again, Agamemnon is completely opaque.

I.iii.150-161 Patroclus' mockery may seem to have some truth in it. . .

I.iii.293-300 Again Nester parrots Agamemnon, but this time more touchingly. His affection for his late wife is apparent somehow, though not explicitly spoken.

I.iii.303 Ulysses, short of words, says it all. Somehow, Shakespeare makes it clear that this one word could mean but one thing: an idea.

I.iii.312 sure 'nuff.

I.iii.343 he hee. small pricks.