Troilus and Cressida--Building a Better Argument

Well, here's my post! I've spent a long while on it. I had some trouble uploading the video and it is sideways, so I apologize. I'm not the best in front of cameras (I'm afraid I'm a bit camera shy, so you'll have to excuse me). Frankly, I am proud of myself for making this video, even if no one else is impressed by it! I hope it's somewhat coherent.
 

Report on feedback from initial draft:

From the comments I got from the blog, I realize that my paper wasn't making enough of an argument. It was simply just trying to explain the reasons why Troilus and Cressida wasn't a tragedy. I realize that that is not enough, but I'm wondering if I should just brashly claim that it isn't a tragedy and move on to a more lucrative claim, or if I need to spend at least a little time explaining why it isn't a tragedy (though not as much as I did in this preliminary draft). I guess what I've learned from people's comments is that I need to focus more on why Shakespeare is going against the traditional tragedy in the play and what effect that has. Since this is a pretty significant shift in the focus of my paper, I'm going to have to do some more research.



Annotated Bibliography

•  Social Graph:

• My cousin Andrea Kokkonen is one of my "homies" I'll be bouncing my ideas off of. She doesn't have any particular familiarity with Shakespeare, but she has a slight interest in it. I've already asked her what tragedy as a genre means to her, and she explained that she thought it was a play that had a lot of death and sadness, with the main character usually dying at the end.
• My friend Shalina Baldwin is an English major at the U of U (I know, I know), and she has always been someone I've bounced drafts and ideas off of. I haven't gotten any feedback from her yet, but I'm hoping that she can read through my drafts and give me some general advice about whether my ideas are coherent.
• I asked Margaret Young, a former English professor of mine who teaches at BYU, for insight into what a tragedy really means and how it affects viewers. She responded and told me that they generally involve a lot of death and despair, but that they usually cause the viewer to feel the same pains that the protagonist feels and causes the audience to come to a deeper understanding of humanity.  I don't think she has taught Shakespeare, but her husband has, and she said she would send me more information.
• I'm hoping to ask my old middle school teacher Carrie Magnuson about her experience teaching tragedies and how students generally respond to them. I once had a great relationship with her, but lately we've fallen out of touch. I'm hoping we can reconnect and that she can share her great insights with me.

•  New Media

• http://avidreader25.blogspot.com/2012/11/lets-read-plays-troilus-and-cressida.html has a good overview of the play itself and does get into some of the deeper themes at work (like why the play is named Troilus and Cressida if so much of it deals with the war itself and not the failed romance).
• http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O46KmGZloHo is a very interesting video that shows one director's take on the play. She talks about themes of heroism (or anti-heroism), honor, and in general the disillusionment that the play demonstrates. These themes are very tied in with my thesis!
• http://www.flickr.com/search/?w=all&q=tragedy+shakespeare&m=text#page=2 I've found some interesting pictures about tragedy and what it means. This is still a work in progress right now. I am hoping to include some of these images to dissect how people would have traditionally seen tragedy. I am also hoping to come across some historical drawings or paintings of tragedy.

• Social Networks
• I am really trying to dig deep into the Twitter sphere to find some sources. I haven't really been able to find much material yet, but I am determined to keep looking around and hopefully find a group that will help me out.
• http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/187518.Troilus_and_Cressida gives me a good look at what readers think of the play, which will be really useful as I dissect it. There are a lot of readers out there that don't like this play, and it's important to know why, as my thesis is focusing on how Shakespeare is breaking convention in this play. I think Shakespeare's breaking convention is the reason why a lot of people don't like the play. They simply don't know what to do with it. I have found a really interesting discussion going on about the idea that Troilus and Cressida is a tragicomedy, and I'm hoping to get initiated into that discussion.

• Traditional scholarly sources

• Oates, Joyce. “The Tragedy of Existence: Shakespeare's Troilus and Cressida.” Originally published as two separate essays, in Philological Quarterly, Spring 1967, and Shakespeare Quarterly, Spring 1966.  This work really helps me grasp the idea of Troilus and Cressida within the context of the tragedy. I am better able to understand how the play defies this traditional genre and how it goes along with it.
• Edmondson III, Henry T. "Rethinking The Values Of War." Public Integrity 8.3 (2006): 233-243. Academic Search Premier. Web. 1 Nov. 2012. This article dissects the play's attitude about war, which is a very important overall theme to the play and will definitely be an important factor as I explain how war and the ending of the play factor into the play's decidedly anti-tragic theme.

•  Places to share
• Criterion, the BYU English journal, is always a good place to start. I wouldn't mind submitting my paper there. Also, I presented in the BYU English Symposium last year and had a great time sharing my ideas. I wouldn't mind participating in this event again!
• http://www.shakesreview.com/index.html The Shakespeare Institute Review accepts papers about Shakespeare from grad students (but hey, why not try submitting, right?). They might be interested in publishing something written about the lesser-known Troilus and Cressida.