Parody, Pastiche, and Camp in Titus Andronicus

As stated in my last post, personally I would not categorize Titus Andronicus to be a parody, a pastiche, or camp. Although, as others have, it is clearly obvious that it can be done, but it is really a personal opinion in any matter. One could consider Titus to be a parody due to its ridiculous content. It could be said that Shakespeare read the "popular" tragedies at that time and found them to be funny so he decided to write a play making fun of them. The scene in the beginning of the play when Titus stabbed and killed his son senslessly would be one of many acts that would support this ideal. One could also take Titus to be a pastiche, that Shakespeare did read (or more likely view) the other tragedies and he felt drawn to them so he decided to write Titus out of respect for or to celebrate the other tragedies. This can be seen throughout the play in the common themes and ideas present in Titus that circled in other tragedies of that time, family honor for example. Lastly one could just as well categorize Titus to be camp and say that Shakespeare tried and put effort into writting a serious tragedy, but that it was just taken so far over the top that it became gaudy and even funny. This point could be supported in scenes such as the one when Titus cuts his hand off and then his hand along with the heads of his two sons are returned to him. Although even I can identify numerous parts throughout the play that could be taken to be a parody, pastiche, or camp, I still do not believe that it was originally written to be any of these. Obviously it can not be proven because Shakespeare alone knows which intrepretation is true, but i believe that it is all simply a matter of personal intreptation and that nearly any statement can be made and somehow supported.

Shakespeare's Intentions in the Writting of Titus

Personally, I don't think Shakespeare had any specific intention in mind (in terms of parody, pastiche, and camp) when he wrote Titus. I think that it was his first tragedy and he was unsure how to portray his thoughts and to what extent he should carry them out to, and in keeping with the time period, his gory, exagerated portrayal is not that out of the ordinary. All of the major plays of that time were extremely gory and more than over the top and exagerated, so Titus does seem to "fit in." Also, if he did not make the scenes so attention grabbing and shocking by means of violence, weaponry, blood, etc... the play would not stand out in the minds of viewers, or it may not even have made it to the stage. Nobody wants to read about/view a play about everyday ordinary people with average lives, we as an audience are much more interested in the lives of people different than ourselves (may it be those a part of a drama, comedy, romance, action, horror, or any genre that exposes us to a life different than our own). Therefore, to please this audience, in any time period, an author must be over the top and must make scences memorable to make a name for himself. This is not uncommon for Shakespere, all of the characters in all of his plays seem to be extremely dramatic, for example Romeo and Juliet falling in love and soon dying for that love in about a weeks time, so the characters in Titus are not much more dramatic than any of his other characters, they just seem to stand out because they are dramatic in such a different way (blood/gore/violence instead of innocence and love.) In conclusion, I don't believe that Shakespeare had any intention of poking fun at any of the tragedies at that time nor do I think he was celebrating them, I believe he was just writting. Some may consider Titus to be camp, but there seems to a time issue with that title because at the time Titus was originally performed, people may not have been as shocked by it as we are, they may have considered it be a normal, average tragedy. Today some may say Titus is camp because we are comparing it to modern literature, but when compared to other plays from that time, I think many would change their minds.

Direction in Small Group 2: Act 4 Scene 2

In act 4 scene 2 many directional decisions were made withing our group as to how we should perform the scene. First and foremost was the enterance to the room and our initial positions in relation to eachother. We entered in the order most common of that time period, the king and his wife entered first followed by the servingman and the nurse (which also happened to be very near the order of lines in the play). Once entered, Capulet stood the closest to the audience with his wife to his side but slightly behind him and the servingman and the nurse slightly behind them to show the definate class structure. Then the king and the servingman had a short conversation and with the kings dismissal the servingman leaves and short after Juliet enters. During the conversation between Capulet and Juliet, Juliet is facing Capulet on her knees at one point to show her plee. All of these decisions were made to accurately represent how a kings household most likely would have been and shows the order of importance of each person with in it.

Film Adaptations in Romeo and Juliet

One scene that I thought Leonardo DiCaprio made many film adaptations (in regards of facial expressions, body language, and voice/tone/line deliverance) to was in his first appearance in the movie. The scene soon after the "rumble" at the gas station and Benvolio had just found Romeo and was talking to him in hopes of finding out why Romeo had been so down lately, Leonardo's performance was exceptionally convincing. He was deep in thought about Rosaline and very in "love" and depressed that he couldn't be with her. This showed through Leonardo's facial expressions and body language when he sulked during the conversation and seemed to be depressed and uninterested in the rest of the world. He didn't perk up to see Benvolio or even seem to be worried or care about what had just happened between the Capulet's and Montague's. This feeling was also apparent through Leonardos voice, his tone was very down, disheartning, and gloomy, and he delivered his lines very slowly and seemed to really think about everything he said before delivering his thoughts.