The Film

I feel another person from a different country might instead of dismiss the city life and get rid of the things we value as american, they might embrace it. They might use their home and their traditions as their starting place but diverge away from what they are used to while settling into an American lifestyle. Someone from a different country might simply leave their pace of origin in order to find out what another lifestyle could be, only to go back to they knew by the end of the story. A change in scenery and adapting a whole new lifestyle can put things into perspective and make you appreciate what you did have. I believe thats wha tthe story of thempest reflects as well as the film we just watched in class.

The Film

The main changes i see within this film is the fact that it happens to have a more modern, present day touch. some of the characters also have a different twist to their role as well. Aretha who i assumed to be the Ariel charatcer played more as Phillips lover than slave, but at the sametime she made it seem like she was a slave to him, but in a joking manner. Another change is Phillip wasnt thrown out of the city, but instead he decided to quit and go move to a small island. Mazurskys perspective of contemporary American life seem to be focused on our need for material things and how we value money which is why I believed he had the phillip charatcer move to another country.

Mama Day

As we mentioned in class, I dont feel as if the play really connected with the tempest at all. After reading A thousand acres and seeing how closely it was related to King Lear, it is hard to see any direct connections with the tempest in this novel. Though there aren't any direct connection within this novel I do see small aspects ofthe play within this novel such as, magic, the storm, and maybe George and Cocoa have some relation to Miranda and her husband in the tempest, but besides these small detail i dont feel like Naylor really wanted to make this Novel as a reamke of the tempest. The consequence of thinking this Novel was remake of the tempest can cause you to miss ceretain points of the book or miss important detail. When i First began to read this novel I was trying to make connection with the tempest but things werent really adding up, and for me it sort of made the novel harder to read and pick up exactly what was going on. The novel is pretty much completely different from the play, it has some aspects that go along with the play, such as the storms and the magic, but there is no real connection between the play and the novel. I believe Naylor may have written this loose adaption to get more attention to her novel from critics and those interested in shakespeare.

Prospero's plan

From my point of view at the beginning of the story Prospero's main plan was to sabotage and seek revenge on those who wronged him. at the beginning of the story i seen him as just someone who abused the power he held, but it was pretty much built up anger he was trying to release on the people who wronged him. As the story started to end there was a change in prospero's attitude as a whole. In act 5 the dialogue changed as well as prosperos. Him and Ariel actually had a conversation where he would actually listening to what Ariel had to say and what Ariel's opinion was. Si i noticed his attitude changed and i also believe his plan changed over all because he actually started to look at what it was he was doing and he somewhat let that revengeful attitude drift away.

Caroline

Caroline I feel is just different then her sisters, maybe something triggered her to want to be different, something she seen as a child or something she noticed that she didnt like, but from the beginning you  could just tell she was completely different then her sisters from the way Ginny decscribes her throughout the story. she kind of describes her as in assertive and ambitious young lady, a person you knew wouldnt be living her whole as a simple farm wife , but as a farmer as she stated in the text. I feel as Caroline jsut wanted more for herself, which is why she happens to be so distant from her family;I aslo feel as if there is something specific that drove her to be this way, as well as drove her other sisters to act the way they do throughout the story.
I feel liek Caroline is meant to come off as a bad person due to various reasons. For example not taking the land that was offered to her, being distant from her father and her sisters. I feel like at this point  the author has made Caroline seem like she has just abandoned her family for a better life, but me personally I feel as if there is alot more to what we have read so far.When it comes to Caroline not taking the land i look at that more as her making a decison for herself, I dont really see it as being ungrateful or defiant, but her taking a stand for herself and not just doing what her dad wanted her to do. Im honestly just starting to see her more as an independent women other than an bad person.

Parallels within King Lear

In the story of King Lear there were various parallels between both King Lear and Gloucester.  Both of them had evil children who they trusted much more than the child theyshould havegiven their trust t, and when it came down to needing the children they trusted,they were betrayed. Edmund being Gloucesters evil and Reagan and Goneril being the evil children of King Lear. . The subplot of Gloucester and his two sons are extremely similar to main plot which involves King Lear and his daughters. By the end of the play these two plots basically share the same message.  Both King Lear and Gloucester were betrayed by the ones who they thought had their best interest in heart, but by the end it was the children they disowned who really cared about their overall well being. Both men make the fatal mistake of disowning the wrong child.. Gloucester has his eyes gouged, while King lear isnt physically blind, but he is blind to what all is really happening in his world. Though he can physically see, he isn't really understanding what has happen or what he has done.
Though Gloucester was literally blind, he along with King Lear were also blind to everything around them.. For example King Lear didnt realize how real Coredlias love for him was, as well as not recognzing that Goneril and reagan were doing nothing but telling him what he wanted to hear. Another example is how neither one of them could recognize who people were when they were dressed in disguise. King Lear didn't notice Kent the whole time he was disguised as his servant and Gloucester, though his eyes had been gouged didn't recognize the voice of his son Edgar while he was disguised as Tom. Both Edgar and Cordelia pretty much put what their fathers have done to them behind them and show their genuine love by sticking by their side throughout the story. Something else that caught my attention is how both Lear and Gloucester both start to realize exactly what was going on towards the end. They both develop spirtually after going through so many hardships throughout the story.

Lears Fool

Lears Fool:
King Lears fool tends to disappear after the third act.
I personally feel the fool was king Lears support system, he was there to be bluntly honest with King Lear, because none else could do so without being punished after telling King what was really going on.Though his main action was being honest with King Lear, he also wasnt much of a fool, He gave King Lear the best advice throughtout his journey and while he was going from daughter to daughter seeking shelter. He played the role of King Lears advisor in my opinion. Once he notcied the King starting to relaize exactly what was going on he was no longer needed. It was like the fools job was done. In some instances I do think The fool and Cordelia played the same role. Not meaning they were the same person, but their role was to advise the King and genuinely look after him, so in a way it was like once he fool was no longer there cordelia came back and she was there to look after him once the fool was gone. Even in the begining once the King got rid of Cordelia the fool was there and towards the end of the play the fool disappears, but Cordelia returns.