Waking Up From A Midsummer Nights Dream Essays - Free Essays

Waking Up From A Midsummer Night's Dream Essays - Free Essays Waking Up From A Midsummer Night's Dream As with every play we read this quarter, we started A Midsummer Night s Dream with only a text. Reading the script is the foundation of Shakespeare, and the least evolved of the ways that one can experience it. There is no one to interpret the words, no body movement o!r voice inflection to indicate meaning or intention. All meaning that a reader understands comes from the words alone. The simplicity of text provides a broad ground for imagination, in that every reader can come away from the text with a different conception of what went on. The words are merely the puzzle pieces individuals put together to bring coherence and logic to the play. Although we all read generally the same words, we can see that vastly different plays arise depending on who interprets them. By interpreting the word-clues that Shakespeare wrote into the script to direct the performance of the play, we were able to imagine gestures, expressions, and movements appropriate to the intention of the playwright. An example of this can be seen in the different Romeo and Juliets: Luhrman clearly had a more modern vision after reading the script than did Zeffirelli did only 18 years before. The live performance at the CalPoly theatre also carried !with it a very different feel less intense, more child-like and sweet with nearly the same words. Reading also affects our experience in that without the text, we would most likely not be able to enjoy Shakespeare at all; having the text makes Shakespeare widely accessible (available for free on the web) to all that desire it. Once the script is obtained, anyone can perform Shakespeare even everyday, non-actor citizens put on Shakespeare whether it be in parks, at school, or in a forest. My experience reading Shakepearean plays has shown me that reading is necessary and fundamental part of grasping the fullness of the works. I had wanted to read A Midsummer Night's Dream for quite some time. Besides being a play by Shakespeare, I believe my desire to do so came from seeing bits and pieces of it done in Hollywood movies like Dead Poet's Society. I didn't realize how much small exposures like! those could cause me to prejudge the actual text; after I had read the play for myself I was surprised at how much the text differed from my expectations. Not knowing the whole of the plot, but rather only bits and pieces, I expected a play filled with fairy dust and pixy-women toe-dancing, laughing, with flowers everywhere, or something like Hylas and the nymphs. What I did not expect was a group of rag-tag laborers putting on a play, young females catfighting over their men, or Titania being enamored of an ass. (Act IV, Scene i, MND) Even with surprises, though, the text by itself held little detail and richness in my mind. I thought it a decent play, but certainly nothing like I had hoped, and I didn't feel involved in it or connected to it in any way. One of the things that did impressed me, though, was finding out for myself how accessible Shakespeare actually is. When it came time for me to learn my lines for Philostrate (MND), I copied them from a site on the internet which posted the text in its entirety. I realized the!n how lucky we are that plays like these survived through the ages, sometimes probably making it from one hand to the next in a form no better than the paperback I carried in my bag. Through my reading, the importance of the text was impressed upon me, and I feel that I have gained a new appreciation for the lasting and foundational qualities of pure script. Viewing Viewing a play adds a kind of second dimension to a textual reading. While our primary impressions of a Shakespearean play are established with the initial reading, those impressions are challenged when we come into contact with a play performed. At this point we have a first hand contrast between how we felt and how someone else felt about the same play. Once we have sampled another's interpretations we necessarily question ourselves on what we would have done differently, had we directed the play. Perhaps something we expected to see on stage was omitted; perhaps! something unusual was added. We might even sample the same play dozens of times, all performed by different companies; it is common, it is even expected, that none of the twelve interpretations will be much the same. Unlike

Battle of the River Plate - World War II

Battle of the River Plate - World War II The Battle of the River Plate was fought December 13, 1939, during World War II (1939-1945). With World War II looming, the German Deutschland-class cruiser Admiral Graf Spee was dispatched from Wilhelmshaven to the South Atlantic. On September 26, three weeks after hostilities commenced, Captain Hans Langsdorff received orders to begin commerce raiding operations against Allied shipping. Though classified as a cruiser, Graf Spee was the product the treaty restrictions placed on Germany after World War I which prevented the Kriegsmarine from building warships exceeding 10,000 tons. Utilizing a variety of new construction methods to save weight, Graf Spee was powered by diesel engines instead of the typical steam engines of the day. While this allowed it to accelerate more rapidly than most ships, it required the fuel to be processed and cleaned before use in the engines. The separation system for processing the fuel was placed aft of the funnel but above the ships deck armor. For armament, Graf Spee mounted six 11-inch guns making it much more powerful than a normal cruiser. This increased firepower led British officers to refer to the smaller Deutschland-class ships as pocket battleships. Royal Navy Commodore Henry Harwood1 heavy cruiser, 2 light cruisers Kriegsmarine Captain Hans Langsdorff1 pocket battleship Tracking Graf Spee Obeying his orders, Langsdorff immediately began intercepting Allied shipping in the South Atlantic and southern Indian Oceans. Having success, Graf Spee captured and sank several Allied vessels, leading the Royal Navy to dispatch nine squadrons south to find and destroy the German ship. On December 2, the Blue Star liner Doric Star succeeded in radioing a distress call before being taken by Graf Spee off South Africa. Responding to the call, Commodore Henry Harwood, leading the South American Cruiser Squadron (Force G), anticipated than Langsdorff would next move to strike the River Plate estuary. The Ships Clash Steaming towards the South American coast, Harwoods force consisted of the heavy cruiser HMS Exeter and the light cruisers HMS Ajax (flagship) and HMS Achilles (New Zealand Division). Also available to Harwood was the heavy cruiser HMS Cumberland which was refitting in the Falkland Islands. Arriving off the River Plate on December 12, Harwood discussed battle tactics with his captains and began maneuvers in search of Graf Spee. Though aware that Force G was in the area, Langsdorff moved towards the River Plate and was spotted by Harwoods ships on December 13. Initially unaware that he was facing three cruisers, he ordered Graf Spee to accelerate and close with the enemy. This ultimately proved a blunder as Graf Spee could have stood off and hammered the out-ranged British ships with its 11-inch guns. Instead, the maneuver brought the pocket battleship within the range of Exeters 8-inch and the light cruisers 6-inch guns. With the German approach, Harwoods ships implemented his battle plan which called for Exeter to attack separately from the light cruisers with the goal of splitting Graf Spees fire. At 6:18 AM, Graf Spee opened fire on Exeter. This was returned by the British ship two minutes later. Shortening the range, the light cruisers soon joined the fight. Firing with a high degree of accuracy the German gunners bracketed Exeter with their third salvo. With the range determined, they hit the British cruiser at 6:26, putting its B-turret out of action and killing all of the bridge crew except the captain and two others. The shell also damaged the ships communications network requiring conning instructions to be passed via a chain of messengers. Crossing in front of Graf Spee with the light cruisers, Harwood was able to draw fire off Exeter. Using the respite to mount a torpedo attack, Exeter was soon hit by two more 11-inch shells which disabled A-turret and started fires. Though reduced to two guns and listing, Exeter succeeded in striking Graf Spees fuel processing system with an 8-inch shell. Though his ship appeared largely undamaged, the loss of the fuel processing system limited Langsdorff to sixteen hours of usable fuel. Around 6:36, Graf Spee reversed its course and began laying smoke as it moved west. Continuing the fight, Exeter was effectively put out of action when water from a near miss shorted out the electrical system of its one functioning turret. To prevent Graf Spee from finishing off the cruiser, Harwood closed with Ajax and Achilles. Turning to deal with the light cruisers, Langsdorff returned their fire before withdrawing under another smokescreen. After diverting another German attack on Exeter, Harwood unsuccessfully attacked with torpedoes and suffered a hit on Ajax. Pulling back, he decided to shadow the German ship as it moved west with the goal of attacking again after dark. Following at a distance for the remainder of the day, the two British ships occasionally exchanged fire with Graf Spee. Entering the estuary, Langsdorff made a political error in making port at Montevideo in neutral Uruguay rather than the friendlier Mar del Plata, Argentina to the south. Anchoring a little after midnight on December 14, Langsdorff asked the Uruguayan government for two weeks to make repairs. This was opposed by British diplomat Eugen Millington-Drake who argued that under the 13th Hague Convention Graf Spee should be expelled from neutral waters after twenty-four hours. Trapped in Montevideo Advised that few naval resources were in the area, Millington-Drake continued to press for the ships expulsion publically while British agents arranged to have British and French merchant ships sail every twenty-four hours. This invoked Article 16 of the convention which stated: A belligerent war-ship may not leave a neutral port or roadstead until twenty-four hours after the departure of a merchant ship flying the flag of its adversary. As a result, these sailings held the German ship in place while additional forces were marshaled. While Langsdorff lobbied to for time to repair his ship, he received a variety of false intelligence which suggested the arrival of Force H, including the carrier HMS Ark Royal and battlecruiser HMS Renown. While a force centered on Renown was en route, in reality, Harwood had only been reinforced by Cumberland. Completely deceived and unable to repair Graf Spee, Langsdorff discussed his options with his superiors in Germany. Prohibited from allowing the ship to be interned by the Uruguayans and believing that certain destruction awaited him at sea, he ordered Graf Spee scuttled in the River Plate on December 17. Aftermath of the Battle The fighting off the River Plate cost Langsdorff 36 killed and 102 wounded, while Harwoods ships lost 72 killed and 28 wounded. Despite severe damage, Exeter made emergency repairs in the Falklands before undergoing a major refit in Britain. The ship was lost following the Battle of the Java Sea in early 1942. With their ship sunk, the crew of Graf Spee was interned in Argentina. On December 19, Langsdorff, seeking to avoid allegations of cowardice, committed suicide while lying on the ships ensign. Following his death, he was given a full funeral in Buenos Aires. An early victory for the British, the Battle of the River Plate ended the threat of German surface raiders in the South Atlantic. Sources Royal New Zealand Navy: Battle of the River PlateLangsdorff of the Graf Spee