Beowulf/Kurosawa
Don't think that just because you don't see me for 5 days that I'm not expecting to see continued evidence of your thinking...that's what this blog is for, after all. I'm eagerly awaiting your continued commentary on Beowulf, or some thoughts on Kurosawa's "Ran." Either will do. . .
LAZ
LAZ
posted by L Lazarow | 6:42 PM
7 Comments:
I find it wierd that Saburu(however you spell it), the youngest son, didn't seem like he was looking out for his father. The way he spoke to his father seemed very disrespectful even though he was right, for the most part. HIs opinion about his father's ruling is very important but he went about it all wrong in my opinion. We're supposed to be comparing this movie to King Lear and as Saburu being Cordelia's parallel, they don't seem that similar as far as how they give respect to their fathers. Cordelia is very respectful but doesn't want to over flatter him. Saburu is very disrespectful and says many smart remarks and is also harsh. Maybe if Saburu would've been more respectful he wouldn't have been banned. Any thoughts?
(I'm not sure if I'm using the right name for the youngest son though haha)
perhaps Kurosawa is able to make the youngest son more rebellious than Cordelia was becuase he is a male character and therefor has more strength to show such disapproval versus a female character?
the anger against the fool during his gourd dance suprised me, along with the anger shown by the father. i thought that the words of the fool would be disregarded as nonsense no matter what? and that they should not take offense to what he says. In shakespeare the fool speaks the truth but Lear doesn't hear it but doesn't feel threatened by it as the characters of "Ran" do.
In reading your notes i can agree with the casting of the fool being very successful. He portrays the character very well, and you definitly get a comic sense from him the minute you see him.
As for the Noh masks, i'm still confused as to how they would have been done? Did actors really use masks in performances? or is it only the concept of keeping your face in a mask like position...
Sadaf, I understand your point about how respect for the elders is extremely important in Japan, and that Saburo is obviously rebelling. What I dont understand is how he then parallels to Cordelia. I thought that she was supposed to represent wisdom and some rebellion against Lear, but she definately did not show the same level of disrespect that Saburo did. In Lear, I felt like King Lear wasn't justified in how he treated Cordelia, while Saburo's words seem to justify Hidetora's actions. I guess what I'm asking a similar question to Jen, and am not sure if Saburo and Cordelia are really that parallel of characters (or at least not in the amount of "Ran" that we've seen)...
Another Ran-related question for you all: As many of you probably noticed, in the huge fight scene at the Third Castle (where almost everyone died and Hidetora got trapped in the castle) there was a lot of blood. This may be a stupid question, but are there any thoughts on why the blood used in those scene was so.. neon-bright-orange-red? It probably seems like an insignificant detail, but I thought it was odd. I'm thinking maybe the theatrically and unrealistically bright blood was meant to parallel Hidetora's facial expressions which are similar to the Noh masks used in Japanese theatre, in that they (masks and fake blood) both may be used to overstate or emphasize something (for the Noh masks, this would be an emotion.. for the blood, it would probably be the horror of the numerous and gruesome deaths.) So Kurosawa then was using the blood to make a point/emphasis (the excess and gore of death and destruction.) Any other ideas?
On a different (more Old English) note . . .
I had a few things to say about Beowulf. A few random impressions/ideas:
When I first started reading the poem (as in the first few pages), the style struck me as what I think is best described as primitively poetic. The repetition (i.e. ll. 979-80 "There was less tampering and big talk then / from Unferth the boaster, less of his blather") makes it seem like the poet is trying to make more out of the story than it really is. (I mean, he says "brag" four different ways.) Maybe this repetitive quality was amplified by the translation so that Heaney could get across the meaning of the Old English?
And since this would have been common folklore passed down verbally, the oral versions would not have had this repetition. A story is easiest to remember if it's simplified, so perhaps the story was in its simplified version when it came to Beowulf's author. And then the author would have tried to re-elaborate, thus the presence of this repetition. (I don't know, maybe that's completely off. I was just wondering if anyone else found the poetic style a little odd.)
If Beowulf's tragic flaw is his pride, why does he at first refuse the offer of kingship?
molly: I think that because each version was told so many different ways and passed on verbally, this version portrays the description many different ways to either emphasize the fact that it was told in so many different ways or to simply explain it in all of the different ways for clarification.
carly: i also think that in some ways Unferth represents a voice of reason. Even if at that point in the story he was incorrect in insulting Beowulf and belittling his accomplishments, this advice is needed in the end of the story. In addition to the advice given to Beowulf that as time passes, his strengths will not be the same, it might be necessary for him to hear this from Unferth earlier on. If you look at it from the perspective that Unferth is necessary to introduce the story about the swimming competition, it brings in the explination of how superior Beowulf is physically and how he will continue to think he is just as superior in the end.
though Unferth may show the doubts of the Danes, others of Geatland showed their doubts in Beowulf. All of the Geats thought he was going to fail and thought that he was going to die in his battle against Grendel. So he is not the only way that the doubt of Beowulf could have been or was shown. that is, if i remebered that correctly.
on the other hand, he does display all of the doubt for the Danes.
Just an additional thought, though Hrothgar had to accept Beowulf's help because of the tradition of the duty a host has to his guest, the text also says that Hrothgar had performed a favor for Beowulf's father in the past, therefore he should allow Beowulf to repay the debt that his father owed. So this is perhaps another reason that he accepts Beowulf's help with little resistance.
Post a Comment
<< Home