Talk:The Taming of the Shrew
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Gender politics controversy
I question whether the extended "Analysis" belongs there. It's fundamentally pov. This play is disturbingly in favor of female submission to the male, just as Titus Andronicus is disturbingly violent. Both may be worthy works of art to be re-interpreted according to contemporary needs, minimizing the submission or the violence, but that at most is a pov that should be part of a "controversy" article, e.g. The Taming of the Shrew Gender Controversy rewinn 05:14, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] The Induction
- More importantly, it seems to be OCRed and input wholesale. It contains the word "Induction" many times where I believe it is trying to say "Introduction" and much more. I'm going to remove it right now. I think that something along these lines that explain both sides of the controversy around the play probably belongs. But this isn't it, at least in its current form. --mako 17:03, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
-
- The Taming of the Shrew DOES have an "induction". AndyJones 20:44, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
- Hunh, so it does. I'd assumed that was a typo, but it seems to be what WS calls it. Well, if it's good enough for Shakespeare ... I'll make the change. rewinn 05:29, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
- I stand corrected. In any case, the large body of removed text still does not belong for other reasons mentioned in the thread. --mako 15:13, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
- The Taming of the Shrew DOES have an "induction". AndyJones 20:44, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
It is not entirely clear if Shakespeare actually gave his introductory act the title "Induction." The 1992 edition of the Folger Shakespeare Library asserts that the term was most likely added by editors later.[1]24.239.123.242 04:50, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
I've seen people editing this article to change induction to introduction. While the induction serves as an introduction, induction is correct. Please don't change it the article. —mako (talk•contribs) 16:04, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Character list
I'm going to make a character list, feel free to add and help. User:Dfrg.msc 23:08, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
- It is Done. User:Dfrg.msc 01:10, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Tsundere?
I don't think using that term to describe Kate suits this entry.
[edit] Copyvio
I have removed the text
The boastful, selfish, mercurial Petruccio is one of the most difficult characters in The Taming Of The Shrew: his behaviour is extremely difficult to decipher, and our interpretation of the play as a whole changes dramatically depending on how we interpret Petruccio’s actions. If he is nothing more than a vain, uncaring, avaricious chauvinist who treats marriage as an act of domination, than the play becomes a dark comedy about the materialism and hunger for power that dictate marriages under the guise of courtly love. If, on the other hand, Petruccio is actually capable of loving Kate and conceives of taming her merely as a way to realize a happy marriage, than the play becomes an examination of the psychology of relationships. A case can be made for either interpretation, but the truth about Petruccio probably lies somewhere in between: he is unabashedly selfish, materialistic, and determined to be his wife’s lord and master, but he also loves her and realizes on some level that domestic harmony (on his terms, of course) would be better for her than her current life as a shrew in Padua. To this extent, Petruccio goes to alarming lengths to impose his mastery on Kate, keeping her tired and hungry for some time after their marriage, but he also insists on expressing this treatment in a language of love, indicating his eagerness for Kate to adapt to her rightful, socially appointed place and his willingness to make their marriage a happy one. Above all, Petruccio is a comic figure, an exaggerated person who continually makes the audience laugh. And though we laugh with Petruccio as he “tames” Kate, we also laugh at him, as we see him satirize the gender inequalities that the plot of The Taming Of The Shrew ultimately upholds.
from the main article. It appears to be copied from [2] verbatim, except the capitalization of the play's name was changed to be incorrect. Pcu123456789 23:14, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Untamed shrews formula
Feminists = shrew × 1000
--Evgeni Sergeev 03:18, 4 March 2007 (UTC)