Misunderstandings

The group presentations went rather well i thought considering that none of us really knew where to start with that question, or so it seemed. I presented on a few ideas revolving around dream/illusion and why i thought act 5 truly expressed the comedic aspects of the play, reflecting that while there was tragedy, it was after all a comedy for entertainment.

One thing i can't stop saying to myself but did not even bother mentioning in my presentation was the play within the play....to me it represents the play (as a dream) within a play (as the reality). Even explaining this idea to my group they looked at me a bit quizzically because i can't seem to explain this the way i want, even now. Our whole life is a play within a play- going back to the concept if all the world's a stage.

For me act 5 reflected the comedy through this idea, but it also opened way to even more confusion creating a more "dreamlike" state for audience or reader. As if we are thinking as we so often do upon waking, "did this really happen?"

i have also been reading Frye's "Myth of Deliverance" which i am so selfishly keeping for quite awhile from the library! Frye says that comedy is a mix of festive and ironic. That is exactly what we have in act5. It is accurately shown in the last part of the play within the play through the desire for dance rather than epilogue. Since i am not horribly deep into this book yet because of my own distractions, the last thing i will mention is the dream vs. Reality. It is really about the dream and the illusion, the imagination that comes with both rather than the reality. I then ask myself why focus on the dream though? Which one is more important? What really happened or what could have or what we think/ want to happen? The latter. Both can be harsh to face so why not add some myth and illusion to our thoughts.