Class Notes--Adam Kissel (Grene's notes are most useful)
Summary | Secondary Sources on the Play | Some Vocabulary
Shakespeare = S; Troilus = T; Cressida = C; Pandarus = P; Diomedes = D
10/29
The paper: should be on Cressida--who is she?--faithful lover gone bad?
(Doniger) -- sees homoeroticism in the conjoining of the love-theme and the war-theme. I.iii, Hector as soldier who can also be in love--the "noble mode"--confluence of the political and sexual (vs. the satirical mode). Doniger finds groups of characters whose separate relations should be investigated; people are likened to each other in many comparisons. Oneness and twoness, 5.2.135.
(Grene) 3.3.215, speech of Patroclus on his rel'p to Achilles.
Feminity of Troilus, 1.1.10, 1.1.110
4.1.47, Aeneas says that T cares more about sexual than political betrayal [but cf. the opposite somewhere else]
Cressida on Diomedes--5.2.21 ff.--she distances herself psychologically from him, "The Greek"; ditto T, 5.2.203.
Disarming: 3.3.235, looking at Hector disarmed; 4.5.152, more of the same; ditto 5.3.1 ff. etc.
Grene (also 11/5)
Shakespeare's source--a translation of Homer.
Two themes--sexual and political--are united perhaps clumsily. Cf. Hector's challenge. War and peace, and/vs. the individual life. War and the state, vs. private life. [the usual public-private problem in a new form]
But the poetry is of staggering quality! The power of the poetry, decisive of change, marks the significant transitions in the characters; e.g., 1.1.50, T's love poem; then, later, we see a new image of T with new poetry at the council (see his stupid speech on honor, there). The poetic speeches carry a great subtlety of characterization. At least the Greeks are subtle, but T seems rather simple. Good poetry by the war-men: Hector, Troilus; also Cressida and even Thersites can wax poetic with quality. The poetry here illuminates the moment rather than the crisis or tragedy-situation.
T never thought it possible to deny Cressida her surrender, though Cressida did, and we're supposed to see the difference. Cressida is haunted by the idea of the two selves always within her. A main exposition of Cressida about herself: 3.2.103 to the end of 3.2.
Troilus and Cressida as humanizing, through poetry especially, the characterizations of Measure for Measure. Troilus and Cressida as what MM means in real terms. It's about principles enunciated poetically and put in a human situation. Poetic power of parody--esp. of Agamemnon. What about all of this formalization of the rel'p btwn who they are and how we know them (esp. by stereotyped convention). Things to consider about formalization: Progress of characters; Eternal devotion; Doubts of self (esp. re: scarf); e.g. Pandar--syphilis. To what extent are the characters bound to be as they are/will be?
Uncommon depth and discomfort. T formalized as the faithful husband; C as the unfaithful wife; P as the professional panderer. But Troilus's faithfulness has cracks in it.
Cressida's Formalization: are there any seeds of unfaithfulness ahead of time? Afterward, what's in the letter? Has she repented? But to T (any maybe also the audience) the letter is just words; actions speak louder. But the point is that she is not uniformly unfaithful. How much of C (and T and P) are already preset formulas? The story is not as simple as the stereotypes (easier to show for T than for C--it's more interesting to be false-as-Cressid than true-as-Troilus).
Cressida: watching scene, 1.2. Seeds of whoredom here? She shows wit and resistance (like Beatrice in Much Ado). Elizabethan women are characteristically frank in talking about sex, though (i.e. don't take back-belly line as whoresome). "Things won are done: joy's soul lies in the doing"--1.2.end.
Cressida: 3.2.87--monster as a mix of parts. Troilus and Cressida conversations--C's suspicion that she may do things that she doesn't exactly want. "I shall repent"--recognition of the two selves; double-guessing herself; hesitation about herself and about the whole process of being in love. Prophecy in words and action: poetry of Troilus-as-true awakens her imagination and forces here to speak about her not-falseness, and that to a greater degree than T spoke about--even to a greater degree than she can honestly admit in herself. The poetry moves in the direction of implied failure (parody).
Troilus's accepting the trade makes C all the more easily false--her histrionics at 4.2.end are overstating the case, but they show genuine feelings. 4.4.60, the glove. Troilus seems in 4.4 to enjoy the parting, being able to assert his trueness again. T on simplicity of truth, 4.4.104. T as infatuated, 4.4.115, as though to protect Cressida is a point of honor for T. T has a fantasy of his own great trueness.
Later, after the trade, Cressida tries to pick up the pieces (what pieces?) and takes on a new resolve (for what?). 4.5, the kissing encounters--she has woken up, and is playing up the advantage (for whatever reasons, even for resistance). 4.5.end, Troilus on the honor of Cressida; cf. to 4.5.56, Ulysses on same.
Diomedes: 4.1.69 on Helen--cf. the different way he acts toward Cressida.
Having shown this Cressida who must pick up the pieces and refashion herself, we confront Cressida's doubleness in 5.2. She isn't sure if Troilus is finally out of the picture or not; giving the sleeve serves as the reminder emblem of T, but also the coming to fruition of her own falseness, which she plays up in 5.2.50-90. Her doubleness is tied to the awakening mentioned above [cf. Chopin]. Here Shakespeare brings the stereotype alive. What does she have left to do now, but send a letter? (Very curious end to the story.)
(remember: boy actors playing female roles. Soft ones play Desdemona-types, rough ones the Cleopatra-types. They were very young--10-11 years--and so got very few lines.)
In the sleeve-scene, T shows his endurance in her falseness, though he promised it in her trueness.
11/12 (Doniger)
Degree/rank/order is undercut by the mockers. 1.3.70, Agamemnon and Ulysses (cf. Thersites)--a great speech about degree. Imitation, Ulysses imitating Agamemnon (cf. Patroclus), as violation of degree. 3.3.40-100, social theory of degree and identity-reflection; the social as the natural. Pride as another problem (Ajax, Achilles), or, rather, overpride. Ajax rise instead of pulling Achilles down, 1.3.387. 1.3.185 ff., the pride of Ajax; ditto 1.3.360 ff. and 2.3.143 ff. Animal pride (?) (Alexander), 1.2.44. Ajax and horse jokes, 3.3.126, 2.1.18. Snubbing Achilles, 3.3.65 ff., 3.3.250 (Thersites/peacock/monster). Thersites as mocker: 2.1.1--runny leaking: breakdown of order/boundary (esp. of body). Cf. more of the same, 2.3, 5.1.5.
Pandarus and Cressida, Helen-Cressida-Troilus-Paris stuff removes the nobility from love/sex. Pandarus: 5.3.100, similar to Thersites (they are social infections); 5.9 looks like a nice ending until it's overturned by 5.10: Pandarus gives us his diseases (rem: Thersites).
(Grene)
T/C/P -- sex and love and forms, war and statesmanship, are put together. TCP as three fakes? The doubleness of the three sexual prototypes. They all have their wobbly identities, their two-nesses (ditto in other plays esp. histories and tragedies). Oppositeness is implicit in the way they have been conceived. Their histrionics as fakes show that they are haunted by their being opposite to their moments and stereotypes. T sells out on action; he can't dominate C enough. C wants to believe that she can find T to be faithful, but he lets her down (see above). Shakespeare on classical heroes--they are the fakes of his day (e.g. Julius Caesar, Antony & Cleopatra and the murder of Cicero, Coriolanus, the history plays); of course the characters are already problematic in Homer. THEME: an inherent wrong relation between the way people are characterized and the way they are themselves. How do people become an almost absurd version of what they are trying to avoid?
THEME: Surveying the past must not be divorced from the present or from doublenss; rather, transcend doubleness with a kind of power. A presentation of a hero in history must take account of an inevitable crookedness in the inner life [cf. Jacob in Genesis]. In the "production" of a human being or an entire civilization, you must include a provision for doubleness, else you end up with corruption [cf. MM]. Fear of histrionic side--is Ulysses exempt from this? Doubleness and temptation.
Hector & Nestor--wife-joking.
Agamemnon, 1.3.1 ff.: long speech about the diligence needed for difficult things. 1.3.140, what goes wrong with the army rulers parallels what goes wrong with TCP. Are they themselves, or an actor's version of themselves?
2.2.10, Hector. 2.2.30, Troilus on reason vs. dreams/emotion.
11/19 (Grene)
Histories. Then, 1608-11, comedies/tragicomedies: Cymbeline, Winter's Tale, Tempest. Black comedies, next: AWTEW, Troilus and Cressida, Measure for Measure. Meantime, tragedies and others ...
Black comedies vs. the other ("white") comedies [also remembering quarto vs. folio editions--e.g. the prologue is dubious, not in the folio]:
Troilus and Cressida: dumbing down of the plot (adulteration from quarto or others?); lack of sympathy for the characters, on the part of the audience; lack of sympathy also for their comments about the world. (cf. Hamlet, JC, Othello, A&C: outcome leaves you (1) certain of the failure; (2) wrapped up with the protagonists; (3) feeling that it couldn't be otherwise; (4) glorying in the way the part is played, in this context; (5) poetry enraptures you with the main point).
Troilus is locked in while Cressida is complex (mostly bad?); her ambiguity comes with the equivocal contents of the letter. Troilus and Cressida as not tragic or really comic either--is everyone really so hollowed out? Everything that could be great, intentionally isn't: in this sense it is anti-tragic. In a black comedy, who do you root for?
Black comedies carry an insignificant plot. We don't want to be a part of this kind of world (though in a regular comedy, we might want to live there; those have a kind of hope). There's enormous pessimism, yet there is no tragedy because there is also no glory (beyond Cressida's goodness?) to be tragic about.
Thersites: embodied rage against everyone.
ACTION--does it carry the concept merely? There seems to be an abandoned plot, being usurped by the poetry.
(Doniger)
Lack of glory, yes. [AK-this is what they're fighting for). How does joking fit into tragedies vs. black comedies?
2.3.40--cf. As You Like It 5.2.85.
Poetry: 4.4.15, Patroclus is a dip if he thinks he has created good poetry, though he may be smart to recognize the truth that is in it. GOOD verse, 4.4.54-55. P quotes bad poetry; others speak good poetry. More GOOD verse, Troilus at 1.1.48 and 1.1.90.
Shakespeare's moods of happy/sad/hope/despair affect the genres of the plays as he writes them.
3.3.end: Ajax is to procure safe-conduct--here is the pageant of Ajax.