Sophie Wilson - Feedback

Paragraph 1 – Your introduction needs work. The wording of it is confusing. Read over it sentence by sentence. Perhaps even get somebody at home to read over it for you, and you will realise that there are some sentences that do not make sense. You need to be a little clearer with what you are saying. Outlineloine who these ‘4 main characters’ are. You do not necessarily have to name ‘Shakespearean conventions’. What you should be doing is simply explainaing that there are elements of Hero which makes her far more akin to characters we would expect in a Shakespearean comedy, and then there are those which would make her fit quite well within the boundaries of tragedy.

Paragraph 2 – Always make sure that, whatever you’re arguing, you start off by saying ‘it could be argued that’ or, ‘ some readers might think that’. When you are dealing with a character who is ambiguous, we always have to sit on the fence a little bit.

I’m not sure it is quite true that Hero has to fake her own death to marry Claudio. The ‘fake death’ only comes about because Hero is advised to pretend that she died until the truth of the matter is revealed.

There is the stem of a good point here. However, you need to draw it out in far more detail.

Firstly, you mention that ‘young lovers overcoming a struggle’ is a convention of Shakespearean comedy. Rather than just dropping this in, why not mention a couple of other examples of Shakespearean comedy couples (not tragedy) who face such struggles.

Secondly, you MUST talk about how this part of the play would be perceived totally differently by audiences of different eras. During the Elizabethan age, chastity was a far more important issue than it is today.  We did work on this in class, if you remember. Today, an audience might be confused, or even offended by the fact that Claudia is let ‘off the hook’ so easily. You must provide evidence when discussing this part of the play. Is Shakespeare trying to create comedy by satirising the Elizabethan views on chastity? You must discuss this.

So basically – extend your points, and provide more evidence.

Paragraph 3 – It is right that you should include a paragraph about deception. This is one of the main devices that Shakespeare uses in order to create comedy. However, again, you must take your analysis much deeper:

*Start by making the point you already have about how deception is a convention used extensively in Shakespearean comedy.

*Talk about how this links to the title of the play, perhaps. ‘Much Ado about Nothing’ means ‘A lot of fuss over nothing’, so Shakespeare is telling us from the off how is use of deception, and the deception used by the characters, will cause a large amount of trouble.

*Talk about the different ways that deception cause comedy. Think about use of masks, characters hiding, character plots (both good and bad). Remember there are lots of plots. The plan for Don Pedro to ‘woo’ Hero. The plot to get Beatrice and Benedick together. The plot to shame hero.

*Talk about how Hero, through this use of deception, actually comes rather close to becoming a tragic character. Sometimes characters who have such tricks played on them end up becoming tragic victims. I would strongly suggest, as I’ve mentioned to the class before, that you read up on ‘Othello’ and make the connection between Hero and the character ‘Desdemona’ in Othello.

Paragraph 4 – This is a bit of a lazy paragraph. You have made a basic point, but you have not extended your argument or used ANY evidence to support what you’re saying. The comparison between Beatrice and Benedick is certainly worth mentioning. However, you need to mention why, specifically, they are different.

Firstly, Beatrice plays a traditionally masculine role (the role of a courtier) through her use of wit, hyperbole and extended imagery. You need to state this and argue using examples. Talk about how attitudes toward women have changed.

Secondly, find some examples of where Beatrice uses Iambic Pentameter to elevate the importance of her words.

Then, compare this witty, important speech to that of Hero. Hero rarely speaks. Even when she is wooed by Claudio, she only whispers in his ear.

The point is good, but it is not really OK at this level to be including paragraphs with no supporting evidence

Paragraph 5 – I’m not really sure what point you are trying to make with this paragraph. You have already stated that Hero does not meet a sad ending. It is because she does not die that this play is, in fact, a comedy. You might want to write a paragraph where you talk about how she is ALMOST a tragic character who ALMOST meets a tragic end. However, you would need to talk about how Shakespeare structurally places the comedy scenes (such as the ones featuring Doberry) in order to add comedy relief, and to reassure the audience that there is little to worry about. Dogberry eve shows up just before the wedding (although he is not listened to) in order to rassure that audience that the comedy character has ‘the truth’, and Hero will not be in trouble for long. Again – EVIDENCE needed.

Paragraph 6 – Again, no EVIDENCE. You MUST use evidence. Talk about the ‘tragic flaw’ theory by all means, but state where this view/theory came from. I think it was Aristotle. Then, you can have an interesting discussion about WHAT Hero’s tragic flaw is. The characters think that it is that she is unchaste. However, Shakespeare has divulged enough information to the audience for us to know that she is, in fact, chaste. So, any references to her infidelity now take the form of dramatic irony. It could be argued that her tragic flaw is that she is too meek, and does not speak enough. Analyse the scenes with Hero in, support this argument with lots of evidence, and it should be a much better paragraph,