Nevermind whether Cressida is a slut...is she even guilty?
Myrna38717
My first thought about T&C was: why is this play called "Troilus and Cressida"
when the love story seems to have such a minor role and, more important,
Cressida seems to get lost along the way?
My second thought (and what's been uppermost on my mind) was: is it possible to
read the play so that Cressida actually is innocent of any betrayal of Troilus
(not just that she's "not a slut," but that she is in some way noble)? Well,
probably not, but I'm going to try and see if I can make myself believe it.
To start: I find it very hard to judge Cressida harshly because we're never
told what her letter to Troilus (5.3) says. Troilus just tears it up and tells
us she's being duplicitous. So, when I reread the scene in which Cressida
"betrays" Troilus (5.2), I start out with some sympathy for her.
This scene reminded me most of the scene in "Othello" (4.1) when Iago hides
Othello so he (O) can eavesdrop on the conversation between Iago and Cassio
about Desdemona/Bianca. In both scenes the "hero" is concealed by someone
whose motivations are at least suspect (Othello by Iago, Troilus by Ulysses).
The hero then watches a scene unfold. In "Othello," we know Iago has set
Othello up. In "T&C," we don't know that...but isn't it possible that we're
being duped along with Troilus?
To continue the comparison...Ulysses reminds me of Iago...he is so
manipulative. (The sleeve in "T&C," of course, takes on the role of the
infamous handkerchief in "Othello.") We know, from scene 4.5 (97-113) that
Ulysses thinks Troilus is a problem. This gives Ulysses a motive for
attempting to undermine Troilus' relationship with Cressida. (Given the
information Ulysses received from Aeneas, I think Ulysses knows of T&C's
relationship. Aside: why is it that these men, who are fighting over a woman,
trust one another with information about their relations with their womenfolk?
Seems odd.)
We also know that Ulysses already has set up one scene for Achilles (3.3), in
order to manipulate him. So we know this sort of set up is part of Ulysses'
way of operating. Now, doesn't it seem odd that Ulysses should lead Troilus to
Calchas' tent precisely as Diomedes plays out this scene with Cressida? (I
know they were following Diomedes...but this particular scene?) And why does
Ulysses conceal Troilus? What could possibly have happened if Ulysses and
Troilus had just followed Diomedes up to the tent?
The only reason I can think of is that Ulysses wants Troilus to see this scene,
to watch it play out. As Cressida and Diomedes speak, Ulysses tells Troilus to
listen. As more words are exchanged, and Troilus becomes more excited, Ulysses
(repeatedly) says they must go, but they don't, of course. Why? Ulysses says
they should leave because "this place is dangerous, the time right deadly."
This makes no sense. Before they left to follow Diomedes, Ulysses initially
told Troilus to follow Diomedes; then Ulysses said he would accompany Troilus
to "keep [him] company." This does not suggest there would have been any
danger to Troilus in following Diomedes on his own, and it's hard to conceive
of any danger to Troilus as long as he is with Ulysses. So why does Ulysses
suggest they leave? I think he's playing the same sort of game Iago played
throughout "Othello" -- Ulysses wants Troilus to stay until the scene is fully
played out, and urging him to go is a way of whetting his appetite to stay.
It's also a way of keeping Troilus from marching right up to Cressida and
asking her what's going on -- by momentarily distracting Troilus from his
passion, Ulysses restrains Troilus and reinforces the notion that Troilus
cannot make his presence known.
So, now I've convinced myself that Ulysses is a manipulator who staged this
scene. The harder question is Cressida's behavior and words. It's entirely
possible that Ulysses set Troilus up to view a scene in which Cressida really
does betray him. This could provide another reason for Ulysses to try to drag
Troilus away as soon as Troilus has witnessed something he sees as betrayal.
Ulysses could be worried that the wrong thing will happen, that Cressida
ultimately will not betray Troilus.
But one question to ask is the one Troilus (bless his heart) thinks to ask:
"Was Cressid here?" Perhaps one might speculate that Cressida really isn't
Cressida; it's someone dressed up to look like her. Troilus and Ulysses are,
after all, some distance away. Can Troilus be sure of what he's seeing?
Trouble is Thersites also is there...he could be mistaken, too, but whatever
his faults a lack of observation skills doesn't appear to be one of them.
The third possibility is that Cressida really does play out this scene, but
she's been coerced into doing it. I do find it bizarre that this thought never
seems to have crossed Troilus' mind...even if I didn't think it was true, I
would entertain it as a possibility if I were Troilus. Perhaps she's been
threatened...maybe her father has been threatened? or perhaps it's possible
she's made some arrangement with Diomedes to save Troilus' life? (He does,
after all, survive the battle...) Granted, it's hard to point to much in her
lines to prop up this theory (and her wavering, if it's fake, is very
convincing), but...there are her last lines:
<<Troilus, farewell! One eye yet looks on thee>>
She knows he's been led there to watch. She really is saying goodbye and
looking at him.
<<But with my heart the other eye doth see.>>
Sees that she has convinced Troilus that she has betrayed him.
<<Ah, poor our sex! This fault in us I find:>>
I can't figure out a hidden meaning for this line, so I'm going to write it off
as Cressida's attempt to distract Diomedes and Ulysses from the real message
she is giving to Troilus:
<<The error of our eye directs our mind.
What error leads must err; O, then conclude,
Minds swayed by eyes are full of turpitude.>>
Troilus errs in believing that the scene playing out before him is something
he chanced upon. In reality, he's been set up and his own error in believing
his eyes leads *his* mind to be full of Cressida's turpitude.
So, there's my theory...maybe it's wacky, but at least it gives me someone to
like in the play and it explains why Cressida's name is in the title. :)
Eileen
Tom Reedy
myrna...@aol.com (Myrna38717) wrote:
<snip>
> My second thought (and what's been uppermost on my mind) was: is it possible
to
> read the play so that Cressida actually is innocent of any betrayal of Troilus
> (not just that she's "not a slut," but that she is in some way noble)? Well,
> probably not, but I'm going to try and see if I can make myself believe it.
<snip>
> So, when I reread the scene in which Cressida
> "betrays" Troilus (5.2), I start out with some sympathy for her.
<snip>
> The harder question is Cressida's behavior and words. It's entirely
> possible that Ulysses set Troilus up to view a scene in which Cressida really
> does betray him. This could provide another reason for Ulysses to try to drag
> Troilus away as soon as Troilus has witnessed something he sees as betrayal.
> Ulysses could be worried that the wrong thing will happen, that Cressida
> ultimately will not betray Troilus.
>
> But one question to ask is the one Troilus (bless his heart) thinks to ask:
> "Was Cressid here?" Perhaps one might speculate that Cressida really isn't
> Cressida; it's someone dressed up to look like her. Troilus and Ulysses are,
> after all, some distance away. Can Troilus be sure of what he's seeing?
> Trouble is Thersites also is there...he could be mistaken, too, but whatever
> his faults a lack of observation skills doesn't appear to be one of them.
<snip>
> Eileen
>
I just finished reading the play and was struck by the ambiguity of the
language in Cressida's "betrayal." It seemed to me that Troilus put a
heavier interpretation on her words than is called for. She knows she's not
going back to Troy (Troilus gave her up with a minimum, it seems to me, of
complaint, which may seem to her to be the real betrayal), and she vacillates
before finally giving in to her fate. I think your reading makes a lot of
sense.
TR
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum
Symposium1
>Greetings. Another newbie here, hoping better late than never? So, here
>goes.
Actually I prefer "better Nate than lever," but welcome, Eileen. I'm glad for
anyone who is willing to discuss the plays, especially this one.
>My first thought about T&C was: why is this play called "Troilus and
>Cressida" when the love story seems to have such a minor role and, more
>important, Cressida seems to get lost along the way?
Good point. My thought is that the title is just like so many other words,
words, mere words, that get undone in the course of the play, eaten. It has
the effect of reminding us that the fate of two people don't amount to a hill
of beans..that love must perish, not so much by the hot sword but by the
"diseases" that Pandarus mentions--diseases of the mind and spirit as much as
of the body. Hesitation, cowardice, lack of faith.
>My second thought (and what's been uppermost on my mind) was: is it possible
>to read the play so that Cressida actually is innocent of any betrayal of
>Troilus (not just that she's "not a slut," but that she is in some way noble)?
Well,
>probably not, but I'm going to try and see if I can make myself believe it.
Eileen, you are better to Cressida than she is to herself.
Cressida: He loved me--O false wench! Give't me again.
Ay, come--
O Jove!--
Do come--I shall be plagued.
Ah, poor our sex! This fault in us I find,
The error of our eye directs our mind.
Cressida never really voices any direct criticism for what Troilus does not
do--that is, at least try to prevent her being sent away from Troy. But we can
bet her, "My lord, will you be true?" was as sharp as a razor. Like her own
virtue, she must see that the walls of Troy will not forever withstand the
onslaught of the Greeks, and she, like Cassandra, must see the end is awful and
at hand.
>To start: I find it very hard to judge Cressida harshly because we're never
>told what her letter to Troilus (5.3) says. Troilus just tears it up and
>tells us she's being duplicitous
I've often speculated that the letter would be a sort of "the cat is on the
roof" type of thing. When in the course of human events...
> So, when I reread the scene in which Cressida
>"betrays" Troilus (5.2), I start out with some sympathy for her.
I have every sympathy for her. Love has become useless to her, and the only
thing with which to occupy herself with, in the hold of the enemy, is sin. At
least, it's what Helen did. And it will buy her some protection against the
rest of the merry Greeks.
>(Given the information Ulysses received from Aeneas, I think Ulysses knows of
>T&C's relationship. Aside: why is it that these men, who are fighting over a
>woman, trust one another with information about their relations with their
>womenfolk? Seems odd.)
Honor is nothing but a convenience in most of this play, a theme but not a
moral.
> And why does Ulysses conceal Troilus? What could possibly have happened if >
Ulysses and Troilus had just followed Diomedes up to the tent?
What would have happened in Romeo and Juliet if Friar Peter had just gotten
that note to Romeo? A little slip of fate makes tragedies of comedies and vice
versa.
>The only reason I can think of is that Ulysses wants Troilus to see this
>scene, to watch it play out. As Cressida and Diomedes speak, Ulysses tells
>Troilus to listen. As more words are exchanged, and Troilus becomes more
>excited, Ulysses (repeatedly) says they must go, but they don't, of course.
Why? >Ulysses says they should leave because "this place is dangerous, the time
right >deadly." This makes no sense. Before they left to follow Diomedes,
Ulysses >initially told Troilus to follow Diomedes; then Ulysses said he would
accompany >Troilus to "keep [him] company." This does not suggest there would
have been >any danger to Troilus in following Diomedes on his own, and it's
hard to conceive
>of any danger to Troilus as long as he is with Ulysses. So why does Ulysses
>suggest they leave? I think he's playing the same sort of game Iago played
>throughout "Othello" -- Ulysses wants Troilus to stay until the scene is
>fully played out, and urging him to go is a way of whetting his appetite to
stay.
Absolutely, it's like Panderus' complaining in scene one that he's finished as
go-between for Troilus and Cressida. He's obviously relishing his role...just
fanning the flames a little. Ulysses' "no, don't look," is irresistably cruel.
>But one question to ask is the one Troilus (bless his heart) thinks to ask:
>"Was Cressid here?" Perhaps one might speculate that Cressida really isn't
>Cressida; it's someone dressed up to look like her.
Hmm...this is pretty farfetched. Surely Shakespeare would let us know this. I
think the "Was Cressid here?" is out of Troilus' disbelief, a sort of
metaphysical argument against reality. See Romeo's "This is not Romeo, he's
some other where" line. If Cressida is his true love, then witnessing her
falseness has sent him into poetic denial.
>The third possibility is that Cressida really does play out this scene, but
>she's been coerced into doing it. I do find it bizarre that this thought
>never seems to have crossed Troilus' mind...even if I didn't think it was
true, I
>would entertain it as a possibility if I were Troilus.
Well, someone made a good point about jealousy in Shakespeare. Some of the
menfolk were pretty quick to accept that their loves had betrayed them:
Othello, Claudio, Posthumus. Troilus in the beginning seems more like Orsino
or Romeo (in love with Rosaline); in the end we reminds me of Claudio in Much
Ado...without, of course, the chance of repenting.
>Perhaps she's been threatened...maybe her father has been threatened? or
>perhaps it's possible she's made some arrangement with Diomedes to save
>Troilus' life? (He does, after all, survive the battle...)
I think this would undo the almost-sure convention of characters revealing
themselves in asides and soliloquies. This is generally where we learn what's
in their hearts, distilled from the commerce of conversation. Take the end of
her appearance in V.ii., and compare it to her soliloquy at the end of I.iii.
Both are Cressida on women and on herself: both seem pretty clear and
conclusive. They mark her character before and after her transformation into a
woman "done", or rather undone. Cressida has learned that she has indeed a
negotiating tool after her loss of virginity--and she has little to do but use
that tool with Diomedes for a little bit of dignity amongst the leering men.
He's just man enough to protect her; Troilus was not.
><<Troilus, farewell! One eye yet looks on thee>>
>
>She knows he's been led there to watch. She really is saying goodbye and
>looking at him.
I don't buy it. I hear more, "My father! Methinks I see my father...in my
mind's eye, Horatio." It is, after all, verse in which she speaks these
lines--illusive, allusive rhyming couplets. Some of the few verse lines in the
second half of the play, in fact. I feel pretty sure she's speaking of her
"mind's eye" as well.
><<But with my heart the other eye doth see.>>
The war between heart and mind.
>So, there's my theory...maybe it's wacky, but at least it gives me someone to
>like in the play and it explains why Cressida's name is in the title. :)
There's part of liking someone that's more like grief, pity, understanding:
"All virtuous persons who hear this song
Whose lives are chaste and placid,
Let them stop their ears to the monstrous wrong
Was wrought long since by Cressid:
Let the good go down to their marble vaults
With wreaths of memory dressed;
But all ye poor lovers who ever were false
Come shed a tear for Cressid.
Let the pure and noble go hand in hand
To the service of God addressed;
Let bridal pairs in their arrassed halls
Lie in honour and pride embraced;
But all ye fond lovers who ever were false
Come drink to the health of Cressid.
Now lift your voices, ye virtuous maids,
And walk in the un enlaced
To a virginal melody sung and played
To curse the sin of Cressid;
Then sweeten your souls with a carol that calls
The name of Mary blessed;
But all ye fair ladies who ever were false
Come breathe a prayer for Cressid.
Come all ye sorrowful and forsworn,
Ye fallen and disgraced,
With crosses woven of willow and thorn
To the resting-place of Cressid:
The roseleaf falls at intervals
Upon the grave unblessed;
And let all true lovers who ever were false
Shed but one tear for Cressid."
(Elinor Wylie, "A Tear for Cressid")
Just my thoughts (and Elinor's).
--Ann
"Is it a world to hide virtues in?" (Twelfth Night, I.iii.131)
Al Badger
far too addled by it right now to contribute any ideas to this thread,
but I do want to let Myrna and Ann know how much I enjoyed your posts --
if this level of care and thought went into every staging of T&C, it
could very easily rise in public estimation. Though I don't know if
Myrna's theory would actually work, I'd love to see a director try it
(the only way to find out). Instead, sadly, we get things like that RSC
nightmare from last year, which would convince most atendees to stick
the play back in the dustbin for another 400 years.
Best (and stay healthy!),
Al Badger
Symposium1
>We've been having a very nasty flu making the rounds at work, and I'm
>far too addled by it right now to contribute any ideas to this thread,
Al, sorry you're feeling unwell. Please don't cough on the modem.
>but I do want to let Myrna and Ann know how much I enjoyed your posts --
>if this level of care and thought went into every staging of T&C, it
>could very easily rise in public estimation.
What a lovely compliment. I'll accept my half with thanks. I'll settle for
seeing just one staging of T&C; I've never seen it except for the "not quite
me" BBC tape. I hear great things about Barbara Gaines' presentation at the
Chicago Shakespeare Rep maybe three years back?--someone faxed me a copy of her
notes from the program, and she said this is one play she wants to direct over
and over again and is sure she'll always have another take on it.
>Though I don't know if
>Myrna's theory would actually work, I'd love to see a director try it
>(the only way to find out).
I didn't mean to be hard on Myrna's theory. In fact, you're right, it would be
an interesting directorial choice. I just think that from what's in the other
plays, if that were the way that Shakespeare had intended it to be played that
way, there'd be some internal evidence.
> Instead, sadly, we get things like that RSC nightmare from last year, which
would >convince most atendees to stick the play back in the dustbin for another
400 >years.
It just makes me sad to know that the RSC production was so badly received.
Our Shakespeare Festival is completing the canon with readings of some of the
lesser played plays. I "saw" Cymbeline on Monday night, and got word they'd be
doing A Winter's Tale, Pericles, Timon of Athens, and Troilus and Cressida.
Usually a director, sometimes a festival director, sometimes not, takes on the
reading and it's done very casually but with a rehearsal or two. I would love
to see them do a little extra thing during the 'talkback" session next time and
have two people face off and debate the "betrayals" -- Cressida's and Troilus.'
They probably won't, so I'll be armed to the teeth with ideas. (they might
kick me out)
Al, get well, sir, so you can come back and discuss it some more.
Myrna38717
In article <19980923235633...@ngol05.aol.com>, sympo...@aol.com
(Symposium1) writes:
>>but I do want to let Myrna and Ann know how much I enjoyed your posts --
>>if this level of care and thought went into every staging of T&C, it
>>could very easily rise in public estimation.
>
>What a lovely compliment. I'll accept my half with thanks.
And I accept my half. And thank Ann for her comments...also Tom. I hope to
come back to this over the weekend.
KQKnave
In article <19980923041...@ladder01.news.aol.com>, sympo...@aol.com
(Symposium1) writes:
>I think this would undo the almost-sure convention of characters revealing
>themselves in asides and soliloquies. This is generally where we learn what's
>in their hearts, distilled from the commerce of conversation. Take the end
>of her appearance in V.ii., and compare it to her soliloquy at the end of
I.iii.
>Both are Cressida on women and on herself: both seem pretty clear and
>conclusive. They mark her character before and after her transformation into
>a woman "done", or rather undone. Cressida has learned that she has
>indeed a negotiating tool after her loss of virginity--and she has little to
do but
>use that tool with Diomedes for a little bit of dignity amongst the leering
men.
>He's just man enough to protect her; Troilus was not.
Jim
KQKnave
>Cressida has learned that she has indeed a
>negotiating tool after her loss of virginity--and she has little to do but
>use that tool with Diomedes for a little bit of dignity amongst the leering
men.
>He's just man enough to protect her; Troilus was not.
That last sentence is a little bizarre, I think. Here is Troilus
warning Diomedes in IV. iv:
Troilus: ...I charge thee use her well, even for my charge;
For, by the dreadful Pluto, if thou dost not,
Though the great bulk Achilles be thy guard,
I'll cut thy throat.
Diomedes: O, be not moved, Prince Troilus.
Let me be privileged by my place and message
To be a speaker free. When I am hence,
I'll answer to my lust; and know you, lord,
I'll nothing do on charge.
Doesn't sound like Diomedes has any plans to 'protect'
Cressida. I don't see Cressida as anything but a leaf
blown about by the winds of fortune. As Troilus says,
(IV. v) She was beloved,she loved; she is, and doth;/
But still sweet love is food for fortune's tooth.
There isn't much Troilus can do because the needs
of the state outweigh any personal needs. I think some
readers make the mistake of trying to impose the hyperbole
of the usual dramatic conventions onto this play, but
none of the cliches will fit here because this is Shakespeare's
foray into realism, a depiction of the world as it is, not
the usual ideal world of popular fiction. In his popular plays
Shakespeare had to pander to the public, but this play
is more like a Eugene O'Neill play than his own works. Sorry
guys, but in the real world women aren't faithful to the bitter
end, (heck, all I did was move to New Jersey...) but you already
knew that didn't you? Or did you want Shakespeare to tuck you
in and read you a nice story about princes and princesses? Sorry
gals, Troilus isn't going to mount his white horse and rescue you,
there's the bitter business of war standing in the way. The
only drama is in watching Troilus realize the world isn't the
place he would like it to be. If he were writing for a modern
audience he could have tacked on an ending where Troilus
and Cressida get back together and realize that neither one
is perfect, but they could still be happy together. That wasn't
possible given the conventions regarding purity and virginity
of his time, so the play fails as drama because there is no
climax, or release of tension, only an unfolding of events. It's
still a great read though, and it's a fascinating look into
Shakespeare's mind, torn from the constraints of popular theatre.
Jim
Symposium1
In article <19980929113349...@ngol05.aol.com>, kqk...@aol.com
(KQKnave) writes:
>>He's just man enough to protect her; Troilus was not.
>
>That last sentence is a little bizarre, I think. Here is Troilus
>warning Diomedes in IV. iv:
>
>Troilus: ...I charge thee use her well, even for my charge;
>For, by the dreadful Pluto, if thou dost not,
>Though the great bulk Achilles be thy guard,
>I'll cut thy throat.
>
>Diomedes: O, be not moved, Prince Troilus.
>Let me be privileged by my place and message
>To be a speaker free. When I am hence,
>I'll answer to my lust; and know you, lord,
>I'll nothing do on charge.
>
>Doesn't sound like Diomedes has any plans to 'protect'
>Cressida. I don't see Cressida as anything but a leaf
>blown about by the winds of fortune. As Troilus says,
>(IV. v) She was beloved,she loved; she is, and doth;/
>But still sweet love is food for fortune's tooth.
What I meant that was by winning her, Diomedes' presence as her lover will at
least protect her from the attentions of the other men..for a little while?
He's not likely to have what he wants taken away from him--not for honor's
sake, but for his own pride.
Other than that, good points. It's just that Troilus starts out not a
character in realism at all but a brooding lover who, at his own whim can
decide he's too lovesick to fight, and a few scenes later, argue for the
continuance of the war!