Twelfth Night Act 1 Scene 3 Summary and Analysis

Act I: Scene 3

Summary

At Olivia's house, Sir Toby Belch, Olivia's uncle, is criticizing his niece for mourning the death of her brother so profusely. He says to her serving girl, Maria, that his niece is melodramatically overreacting, and he thoroughly disapproves. Maria disapproves of several things herself: she disapproves of Sir Toby's arriving at such a late hour, dressing so slovenly, and drinking so much. Only yesterday, Olivia complained of these things, plus the fact that Sir Toby brought someone who he thinks is the perfect suitor to the house, Sir Andrew Aguecheek. Despite Maria's calling Aguecheek a "fool and a prodigal," Sir Toby is proud of the chap — a fitting suitor for his niece: Aguecheek, he says, receives three thousand ducats a year, plays the violincello, and speaks several languages. Maria is not impressed. To her, the man is reputed to be a gambler, a quarreler, a coward, and a habitual drunkard.

When Sir Andrew joins them, there follows a brief exchange of jests, most of them at Sir Andrew's expense. Maria leaves, and the two men discuss Sir Andrew's chances as a prospective suitor of Olivia. Sir Andrew is discouraged and ready to ride home tomorrow, but Sir Toby persuades him to prolong his visit for another month, especially since Sir Andrew delights in masques and revels and, as Sir Toby points out, Sir Andrew is a superb dancer and an acrobat, as well. Laughing and joking, the two men leave the stage. It is obvious that Sir Toby has a secret and mysterious purpose for wanting to persuade Sir Andrew to stay and woo the fair Olivia.

Analysis

With this scene, we are introduced to still another set of characters: in the modern idiom, we have already met the "upstairs" characters; now we meet the "downstairs" characters. Sir Toby Belch, Sir Andrew Aguecheek, and Maria form the subplot that counterbalances the main plot. Sir Toby Belch, as his name implies, is characterized by his heavy drinking and by his obese, corpulent frame. In an earlier play, Shakespeare created a similar type of character in Sir John Falstaff (See Henry IV, Part I and Part II); this character was extremely popular with Elizabethan audiences, and Sir Toby is reminiscent of the earlier Sir John; both are plump, jolly knights with a penchant for drinking, merrymaking, and foolery of all types. In this play, Sir Toby spends most of his time complimenting Sir Andrew so that the latter will continue to supply him with money for drinking and cavorting. Sir Toby's niece, we discover, is too withdrawn in her melodramatic mourning to be aware of the partying going on in her house, but when she does become aware of it, she disapproves and relies upon her steward, Malvolio, to keep her household in order; thus, Malvolio will soon become the butt of the partymakers' jokes.

Maria, another member of the subplot, is Olivia's vivacious, clever, and mischievous maid. She comes from a Shakespearean tradition of servants who are wittier and cleverer than the people who surround them. Thus, she will be seen to be far more witty than Sir Andrew Aguecheek is, and he will become the object of her many jokes and puns, but he will never realize the extent to which Maria ridicules him.

Sir Andrew Aguecheek is necessary for the plot mainly because he is in possession of three thousand ducats a year, and Sir Toby is anxious to remain on good terms with him so as to be a recipient of the eccentric knight's beneficence. Consequently, he continually plots ways to make the knight think that Olivia is indeed receptive to the romantic overtures of the tall, skinny, ridiculous knight. Now we know that two vastly different people, Duke Orsino and Sir Andrew Aguecheek, are both seeking the hand of the Lady Olivia. Later, Malvolio will become a third "suitor," by a ruse played upon him by Maria and her cohorts.

Click here for Twelfth Night Act 1 Scene 4 Summary and Analysis 

Read More

Fleur Adcock Immigrant Summary Analyzing

Fleur Adcock‟s “Immigrant”

Summary: The poem "Immigrant" was written by the author Fleur Adcock, focusing on her personal experience when migrating from New Zealand to London, England sometimes during the 60s. The poem talks about her 8th month in London on a bridge looking at the pelicans down on the surface of the river. She watched them while describing their awkward motion of ducking their beaks under the water. Adcock then reveals the fact that she is still trying to practice of avoiding her New Zealand accent.

Analyzing: The poems literally talks about her personal experience with Saint James Park's scenery when visiting the place. Adcock used the metaphor "pelicans" with respect to immigrants because pelicans are the "immigrant" birds on the lake trying to cope with the environment and surrounding. This portrays the assimilation process as the author and the pelicans both trying to adapt to the new environment. One person trying to fix her pronunciation while the animals trying to cope with natural environment. The tone of the poem is calm, follows by a description of the activities of the pelicans, which stimulated the reader a sense of 

peace, yet awkward. The poem reflects the processes of immigration and assimilation.

Fleur Adcock (b.1934) is a New Zealander by birth but spent part of her childhood in England, returning to live in London in 1963. She worked as a librarian until 1979 before becoming a freelance writer. She is the author of ten books of poetry and a collected edition of her work, Poems 1960-2000, was published by Bloodaxe in 2000. Recipient of a Cholmondeley Award in 1976 and a New Zealand National Book Award in 1984, she was awarded an OBE in 1996.

The influence of Fleur Adcock's migratory childhood can be traced in her work's exploration of identity. In her poem 'Immigrant' this is specifically an issue of voice as she practices her newly adopted English accent. Several of the poems here examine roots and rootlessness: as she puts it in 'Chippenham', a poem recalling her status as the odd one out in an English classroom, "Who did I think/I was . . .?" Identity is also an issue of gender: in 'The Russian War' a returning uncle claims he'll "be a thing called oral history" but Adcock is acutely aware of those female ancestors whose stories have disappeared, like the silent labouring woman in 'Water'. Her poems often bring to light women's lives that might otherwise be marginalised or forgotten, as in the poignant vignettes of suffering in 'The Soho Hospital for Women'. However, her poems have no air of stridency: her characteristic tone is restrained, rational, conversational. Adcock herself has talked about this poetic strategy: "The tone I feel at home in is one in which I can address people without embarrassing them; I should like them to relax and listen as if to an intimate conversation". ('Not Quite a Statement', Strong Words, Bloodaxe Books, 2000).

Certainly this quality of intimacy is to the fore in her Archive recording. Her reading voice is clear and distinct, striking the consonants with precision and just the faintest hint of her original accent. A particular pleasure are her generous explanations of the poems and the insights she gives into her creative process: apparently "the bath is a very good place for getting inspiration."

Her recording was made on 13 June 2001 at The Audio Workshop, London and was produced by Richard Carrington.

Read More

Emily Dickinson A Bird came down the Walk summary analysis

Emily Dickinson „s “A Bird came down the Walk”

Summary

The speaker describes once seeing a bird come down the walk, unaware that it was being watched. The bird ate an angleworm, then “drank a Dew / From a convenient Grass—,” then hopped sideways to let a beetle pass by. The bird’s frightened, bead-like eyes glanced all around. Cautiously, the speaker offered him “a Crumb,” but the bird “unrolled his feathers” and flew away—as though rowing in the water, but with a grace gentler than that with which “Oars divide the ocean” or butterflies leap “off Banks of Noon”; the bird appeared to swim without splashing.

Form

Structurally, this poem is absolutely typical of Dickinson, using iambic trimeter with occasional four-syllable lines, following a loose ABCB rhyme scheme, and rhythmically breaking up the meter with long dashes. (In this poem, the dashes serve a relatively limited function, occurring only at the end of lines, and simply indicating slightly longer pauses at line breaks.)

Commentary

Emily Dickinson’s life proves that it is not necessary to travel widely or lead a life full of Romantic grandeur and extreme drama in order to write great poetry; alone in her house at Amherst, Dickinson pondered her experience as fully, and felt it as acutely, as any poet who has ever lived. In this poem, the simple experience of watching a bird hop down a path allows her to exhibit her extraordinary poetic powers of observation and description.

Dickinson keenly depicts the bird as it eats a worm, pecks at the grass, hops by a beetle, and glances around fearfully. As a natural creature frightened by the speaker into flying away, the bird becomes an emblem for the quick, lively, ungraspable wild essence that distances nature from the human beings who desire to appropriate or tame it. But the most remarkable feature of this poem is the imagery of its final stanza, in which Dickinson provides one of the most breath-taking descriptions of flying in all of poetry. Simply by offering two quick comparisons of flight and by using aquatic motion (rowing and swimming), she evokes the delicacy and fluidity of moving through air. The image of butterflies leaping “off Banks of Noon,” splashlessly swimming though the sky, is one of the most memorable in all Dickinson’s writing.

In the Garden A bird came down the walk: He did not know I saw; He bit an angle-worm in halves And ate the fellow, raw. And then he drank a dew From a convenient grass, And then hopped sidewise to the wall To let a beetle pass. He glanced with rapid eyes That hurried all abroad,-- They looked like frightened beads, I thought; He stirred his velvet head Like one in danger; cautious, I offered him a crumb, And he unrolled his feathers And rowed him softer home Than oars divide the ocean, Too silver for a seam, Or butterflies, off banks of noon, Leap, plashless, as they swim.

The speaker observes the bird and tries to establish contact with the bird by offering it food. The bird flies off. A few of the speaker's details describe the bird as a wild creature in nature, and more details present his behavior and his appearance in terms of human behavior.

Stanza one

Because the bird does not know the speaker is present, he behaves naturally, that is, his behavior is not affected by her presence. We see the bird's "wildness" or non-humanness in his biting the worm in half and eating it. "Raw" continues to emphasize his wildness. Ironically the word "raw" carries an implication of civilized values and practices ("raw" implicitly contrasts with cooked food). Why mention that the bird ate the worm raw? Would you expect the bird to cook the worm? In contrast, the fact that the bird "came" down the walk sounds civilized, socialized.  Does this description sound like someone walking on a sidewalk?

Stanza two

The birds' drinking dew (note the alliteration) suggests a certain refinement, and "from a grass" makes the action resemble the human action of drinking from a glass. And the bird politely allows a beetle to pass.

Stanza three

In lines one and two, the description of the bird's looking around is factual description and suggests the bird's caution and fear, as well as a possible threat in nature. With lines three and four, the speaker describes the bird in terms of civilization, with "beads" and "velvet."

Stanza four

The idea of danger in nature is made explicit but remains a minor note in this stanza and in the poem. It occupies only half a line, "Like one in danger." "Cautious," the speaker offers the crumb. How is "cautious " meant? Does the speaker feel the need to be cautious? or does she offer the crumb cautiously? (One of the characteristics of Dickinson's poetry is a tendency to drop endings as well as connecting words and phrases; you have to decide whether she has dropped the -ly ending from "cautious.")

Her action causes the bird to fly off. Her description of his flight details his beauty and the grace of his flight, a description which takes six lines. Does the idea of danger or of the bird's beauty receive more emphasis, or are the danger and the beauty emphasized equally? Does it matter in this poem whether one receives more emphasis than the other, that is, would the different emphases affect the meaning of the poem?

I am suggesting that this poem reveals both the danger and the beauty of nature. Does the poem support this reading? What might Dickinson's purpose be in having the narrator see the bird in "civilized" terms? Is it a way of pushing away or of controlling the threat and terrors that are always present and may suddenly appear in nature?

Read More