soph (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
sophia_sol) wrote2014-02-11 06:33 pm
sophia_sol) wrote2014-02-11 06:33 pm
Entry tags:
coriolanus some more
Continuing my thoughts from yesterday - the other thing is, Coriolanus is such a political play! And I'm not sure how I'm supposed to interpret its politics either. According to the wiki article on the play, Brecht once began working on an alteration of the play that would forefront the people's issues, sympathizing with them - and he found that it was really very easy to do and not much had to be altered. But also according to the wiki article, the play was once banned in France because of the use that fascists were making of it. So it is a play that can be used to support some fairly opposed viewpoints!
Ultimately, in my opinion, the play isn't really on anyone's side? The people are fickle and shallow and easily led, but also have some very good points. Coriolanus is breathtakingly arrogant and dismissive and self-righteous, but also strangely honourable. Coriolanus's mom is overly concerned with honour, but also willing to sacrifice her dignity for the good of Rome. And frankly (other than Cominius and some minor characters) Aufidius comes off the best of anyone in this play, and he's the enemy!
(I'm fascinated, btw, with the strength of the mother-son relationship in this play. It's arguably the most important relationship in the whole play - the runner-up being Coriolanus/Aufidius)
I feel like I need to rewatch/reread the ending of the play to figure out what judgements are being made. Is Coriolanus wrong for acceding to his mother's petition? He certainly seems well aware that in agreeing to forge peace between Rome and the Volsces he is agreeing to his own death - although it's not like he comes across as particularly afraid of death in the rest of the play! Aufidius et al see Coriolanus' decision as a betrayal, and understandably - and I think Coriolanus sees his own decision there as a betrayal as well? But on the other hand, I personally can't help but see his decision as the right one, because ultimately peace is better for a people than war. Peace between the Romans and Volsces is a good thing, even if most of the important characters in the play are appalled at the notion. But what's the play arguing? - not my opinion, not Coriolanus' opinion, not Aufidius' opinion, but the play's opinion?
I'd just really like to figure out what the play's intending to say about what's right and what's wrong in the whole complicated mess the characters are involved in.
Ultimately, in my opinion, the play isn't really on anyone's side? The people are fickle and shallow and easily led, but also have some very good points. Coriolanus is breathtakingly arrogant and dismissive and self-righteous, but also strangely honourable. Coriolanus's mom is overly concerned with honour, but also willing to sacrifice her dignity for the good of Rome. And frankly (other than Cominius and some minor characters) Aufidius comes off the best of anyone in this play, and he's the enemy!
(I'm fascinated, btw, with the strength of the mother-son relationship in this play. It's arguably the most important relationship in the whole play - the runner-up being Coriolanus/Aufidius)
I feel like I need to rewatch/reread the ending of the play to figure out what judgements are being made. Is Coriolanus wrong for acceding to his mother's petition? He certainly seems well aware that in agreeing to forge peace between Rome and the Volsces he is agreeing to his own death - although it's not like he comes across as particularly afraid of death in the rest of the play! Aufidius et al see Coriolanus' decision as a betrayal, and understandably - and I think Coriolanus sees his own decision there as a betrayal as well? But on the other hand, I personally can't help but see his decision as the right one, because ultimately peace is better for a people than war. Peace between the Romans and Volsces is a good thing, even if most of the important characters in the play are appalled at the notion. But what's the play arguing? - not my opinion, not Coriolanus' opinion, not Aufidius' opinion, but the play's opinion?
I'd just really like to figure out what the play's intending to say about what's right and what's wrong in the whole complicated mess the characters are involved in.
no subject
I think the play is probably arguing for peace, but the major players (not just Coriolanus, but also Aufidius, Volumnia) have no idea how to live at peace. "Military guy doesn't know how to live in civilian world" is a theme that is strong in this play but is actually recurrent in Shakespeare - think also of Much Ado, Othello. (slight tangent, but even Henry V, beyond Those Two Speeches, is incredibly cynical about war, and that's one of the things I love about it.)