Related Keywords

No Related Keywords

Register NowHow It Works Need Essay Need Essay
"Marlowe's biographers often portray him as a dangerously over"“ambitious individual. Explore ways this aspect of Marlowe's personality is reflected in 'Dr. Faustus.' " Christopher Marlowe lived during the Renaissance period in 16th century England. Although this was a time of change, the Elizabethans still had fixed moral values. 'The Chain of Being,' a concept inherited from the Middle Ages, can be described as a hierarchy of society, with the monarch at the top and the lowliest peasants at the bottom. Below people were animals, plants and rocks. During the Elizabethan era, 'dangerous ambition' would probably involve trying to break the 'Chain of Being' and striving to increase one's social status. It was believed to be necessary to accept one's place in the chain, as to disrupt it and overcome the set order of society could mean chaos would follow. Faustus was an exceedingly ambitious man, even in relation to what is considered to be ambitious by people in today's society. In the prologue, The Chorus sums up Faustus' background and early life, emphasizing his ordinary background and academic success. It seems that Faustus' intellect made him become proud and this fired up his ambition. When Marlowe presents Faustus in scene 1, Faustus methodically shuns great authors and classically intellectual subjects, such as medicine and law because they hold little attraction to him, line 11 'A greater subject fitteth Faustus' wit.' The above quote shows how Faustus elevates himself above taking up an intellectual pursuit that would be highly esteemed by the Elizabethans. Another sign that Faustus holds himself in high regard is that he refers to himself in the third person, also shown in the above quote. Faustus' discusses beliefs that he will no longer hold and describes what he wants to achieve in his opening soliloquy. Faustus may be seen as blasphemous in the opening speech, implying that he would only be a doctor if he could be equal to God, lines24-6 'Couldst thou make men live eternally Or, being dead raise them to life again, Then this profession were to be esteemed.' This is made more obvious when Faustus lastly says, line 62 'A sound magician is a mighty god.' Marlowe portrays Faustus as being over-ambitious by his turning to magic, which is a much more sinister and much less conventional pursuit than others that he had been discussing previously. Faustus hopes that magic will make him omnipotent and god-like. There is little evidence to suggest that Marlowe himself wanted power over others, but his rise in society from a shoemaker's son to a scholar at Cambridge University and later, a spy, was extremely rare at the time. Marlowe did not lead a normal Elizabethan life; in fact, one could say that it was similar to fiction. The over-ambitious part of Marlowe's personality is reflected in Faustus because it seems Marlowe must have wanted success in his life, and to over-reach his set path in life. It becomes clearer as the play continues that Faustus is a dangerously ambitious person when in scene 3 he discusses the deal with a devil, Mephastophilis, concerning the selling of his soul to the Devil in return for earthly power. When Faustus makes the contract, it seems as if he is not thinking ahead as his attitude is carefree. He possibly does not believe in Hell, or that he has a soul, or about the reality of the bargain. His attitude at this point can be summed up by the following phrase Scene 4, lines 103-4, 'If I had as many souls as there be stars, I'd give them all for Mephastophilis.' Faustus' ambition for power and lack of foresight are what doom him later on in play. Arguably, ambition can be said to have caused the downfall of Marlowe himself. His violent murder in a London tavern in 1593 was mysterious and historians often question possible motives for killing Marlowe; his drive to succeed may have made other people envious and resentful. In 'Dr. Faustus', other characters are probably envious of Faustus too. In one of the comic scenes, scene 6, we learn that Robin and Rafe have stolen one of Faustus' books and plan to use it to seduce a woman. They must have been jealous of Faustus' power and his magical aptitude; however it is not the case that he is murdered by these characters later on in the play. Faustus is ambitious and enjoys his newfound power until the end of the play, despite being warned of the reality of his empty bargain by the Old Man and by the Good Angel throughout the play. The Old Man says in scene 12 lines 107-9, 'Ambitious fiends, see how the heavens smiles At your repulse, and laughs your state to scorn. Hence hell, for hence I fly unto God.' This moment foreshadows Faustus' lines at the end of the play, where, horrified, he must face the Devil and Hell. Faustus' ambition makes him a more human character despite him his selling his soul to the Devil, which may make him more difficult for the audience to relate to because of the extraordinary situation. His intellect sometimes creates doubts in his mind about the bargain that he has made, but his ambition overrides his conscience until the very end. This is shown by the Good and Evil Angels, who appear in scenes 1 and 5. They are binary opposites and in my view are present to put another side to Faustus' personality "“ a conscience. The Good Angel tries to motivate Faustus to repent by concentrating on God's anger. However the Evil Angel contradicts the Good Angel, Scene 5 lines 253-6 'EVIL ANGEL: Too late. GOOD ANGEL: Never too late, if Faustus can repent. EVIL ANGEL: If thou repent, devils shall tear thee in pieces. GOOD ANGEL: Repent, and they shall never rase thy skin.' The Good and Evil Angels' stichomythic dialogue is not too realistic and shows how torn Faustus is between the two sides. He is easily swayed and believes the angel that speaks last, but it is interesting to bear in mind that despite the warnings, his ambition stays with him to the end and leads to his downfall. Marlowe portrays Faustus' ambition as dangerous; it was the cause of his demise. Perhaps Marlowe used the theme of over-ambition as a warning to the audience, who would be likely to be wary of ambition - it was looked down on as a negative personality trait in Christian England. Ideas around at the time such as 'The Chain of Being' reinforced religious opinion into people's everyday lives and morality plays popular from the early 1400s to the 1580s were used to strengthen people's Christian principles, as 'Dr. Faustus' also does by discouraging ambition. Marlowe reflects ambition in the character of Faustus to deter the audience from being ambitious, and over-reaching their place in the 'Chain of Being'. However, if Marlowe chose to be 'dangerously over-ambitious' and regarded himself as this, it is likely that he may have written 'Dr. Faustus' differently, not viewing ambition in such a negative way. Whatever Marlowe's view on ambition was, it is not made clear in the play, through Faustus or other characters. Certain aspects of his personality are indeed reflected in Faustus, which make reading the play and exploring Faustus as a character even more intriguing.
0 User(s) Rated!
Words: 1277 Views: 174 Comments: 0
"Marlowe's biographers often portray him as a dangerously over–ambitious individual. Explore ways this aspect of Marlowe's personality is reflected in 'Dr. Faustus.' " Christopher Marlowe lived during the Renaissance period in 16th century England. Although this was a time of change, the Elizabethans still had fixed moral values. 'The Chain of Being,' a concept inherited from the Middle Ages, can be described as a hierarchy of society, with the monarch at the top and the lowliest peasants at the bottom. Below people were animals, plants and rocks. During the Elizabethan era, 'dangerous ambition' would probably involve trying to break...

Marlowe reflects ambition in the character of Faustus to deter the audience from being ambitious, and over-reaching their place in the 'Chain of Being'. However, if Marlowe chose to be 'dangerously over-ambitious' and regarded himself as this, it is likely that he may have written 'Dr. Faustus' differently, not viewing ambition in such a negative way. Whatever Marlowe's view on ambition was, it is not made clear in the play, through Faustus or other characters. Certain aspects of his personality are indeed reflected in Faustus, which make reading the play and exploring Faustus as a character even more intriguing.

Become A Member Become a member to continue reading this essay orLoginLogin
View Comments Add Comment

Anthony Grafton and Bruno... Anthony Grafton and Bruno Latour may be considered as people of knowledge and education. They both were engaged in the process of knowledge acquiring and transforming it into their own ideas and new horizons of thought. For most aficionados, Princeton historian Anthony Grafton put the bon mot in play a few years ago in his elegant The Footnote: A Curious History Harvard University Press. Now, however, in The Devil's Details: A History of Footnotes Invisible Cities Press, former Amherst College dean Chuck Zerby, in his odd doppelgänger to Grafton's volume, merely credits Grafton with reusing the line while stating see backhanded compliment at Zerby footnote No. 31, "Grafton indicated that three other scholars have used the quip." That is, before Zerby made it four and your writer made it five. 1 But can we trust Zerby? His initial footnote to Grafton's book, on Page 13, gives the publication date as 1999. By Page 55, the date reverts to 1997 the correct year, where it remains in subsequent citations. Is this the Devil teaching Zerby manners, befouling his own Grafton footnote as punishment for the author's daring, as a mere freelancer, to zap our leading footnote-ologist? Another Zerby aside, commenting on a purportedly inadequate Grafton citation "Grafton's annotation is not as fulsome [sic] as one might wish", suggests that less preternatural causes, like carelessness, prompt Zerby's error. But this aggressive proponent of a footrace within the historiography of the footnote does remind us that Grafton's own crediting of the remark under whelms. The eminent Renaissance scholar points readers to a 1976 book, Cole Lesley's Remembered Laughter: The Life of Noel Coward, in which Coward "attributed a stronger version of the remark to John Barrymore." 3 Any chance Barrymore stole it from Edwin Forrest? Grafton begins his search with what prove to be two straw men: the nineteenth-century German historian Leopold von Ranke and the late-eighteenth-century English historian Edward Gibbon, who share the reputation of having perfected modern historical scholarship. Despite Ranke's impressive combination of narrative and analytical history and Gibbon's blending of massive knowledge and high style, neither, according to Grafton, was the first to practice the art and craft of documented, critical history. Behind both were ancient, medieval, and Renaissance prototypes, numerous historians who not only told stories but cited evidence as well. Among them were the Italians Bernardino Corio, Leonardo Bruni, and Giannantonio Campano; the Englishmen Richard White and Ben Jonson; and, most impressively, the great French historian Jacques-Auguste de Thou. The latter wrote a "genuinely new kind of history" in what would prove to be the longest historical narrative before the twentieth century. 2 Other prototypes of modern scholarship included seventeenth-century church historians and antiquaries, particularly the German Jesuit Athanasius Kircher, whose massive, illustrated study of ancient China marked the maturation of a tradition of historical documentation reaching all the way back to the fourth-century Christian historian Eusebius and the venerable eighth-century English monk known as Bede. Here, too, one can find a combination of technical argument and deep documentation that anticipates modern historical scholarship. Also helping to make the primary source supreme within this tradition of scholarship were the bitter tracts of warring Protestants and Catholics. The seventeenth century was nonetheless a step up in historical scholarship because that century's church historians and antiquaries, as well as exceptional scholars like de Thou, subjected documents to a higher degree of scrutiny, allowing "the [prior] age of primitive accumulation of ecclesiastical-learning . . . to give way to one of analysis and investment." 4 However, Mr. Grafton again insists that the work of these scholars also provides an "insufficient" explanation for the rise of the footnote. So who, or what, in the end was the key player in the birth of the new professional scholarship the footnote came to represent? For Grafton, that honor belongs to a scholar and a work he first discovered as a college undergraduate: the great Dictionnaire of Pierre Bayle. "Swarming" with footnotes and irreverencies, and aspiring to expose and correct all the mistakes then existing in other reference books, Bayle's dictionary is truly a young man's book. It was written against the background of the "deconstruction" of the scientific authority of the ancients at the hands of the new seventeenth-century scientists Rene Descartes, Francis Bacon, Blaise Pascal, and Robert Boyle. Here the modern "rules of scholarly procedure" and historical scholarship as we know them today finds their definitive statement. 3 Although Grafton proclaims Bayle's uniqueness, he diminishes it somewhat by his extensive honor roll of earlier prototypes and by the revelation that Bayle was not, as the Germans like to say, always sauber "he silently abridged and consciously or unconsciously misread texts". So, in the end, the hero of Grafton's story turns out to be far from indisputable. If there is a failing in this very ambitious and informative little book, it is the absence of a discussion of what the "rise of the footnote" or modern scholarship has meant for the reading public outside the academy. Grafton writes about a very comfortable scholarly world that he obviously loves. The only discordant note he finds is arguably one only a scholar in such a position would take notice of and lament: the footnote's "stylistic decline to a list of highly abbreviated archival citations." 4 A more interesting question is how the footnote has affected the scholars it obsesses. Is it also the source of inaccessible scholarship and academic cliques"”networks of scholars who write primarily to and for themselves, aloof from the general, educated public? Has the rise of the footnote contributed to that historical illiteracy and denial now rampant in many of our schools and universities? Could it be the footnote that has enabled so many scholars to walk away from their pedagogical responsibility to inform and enlighten their fellow citizens? There may be a larger, less abstract, and more important story still to be told about the modern footnote. 4 Any trusting and innocent soul who has taken hope from the many obituaries for poststructuralism that have appeared in the last several years should read Aramis or The Love of Technology by Bruno Latour. Although some English departments are moving tentatively away from poststructuralism, it is thriving in other quarter's freshman composition programs, sociology, and "science studies," the field in which Latour is preeminent. This book, published by Harvard University Press in both cloth and paper covers and well advertised, is clearly expected to reach a large audience"”not some tiny pedantic sect. If it does have a lot of enthusiastic readers, the intellectual world is in more trouble than most English professors dream. Aramis is a poststructuralist novel, a pastiche of different voices, set in different typefaces; the subject of the novel is the failure of the French to build a much discussed public-transportation system with detached cars linked by magnetism and run by computers. Latour says of the book: "a young engineer is describing his research project and his socio-technological initiation. His professor offers a running commentary. The invisible author adds verbatim accounts of real-life interviews along with genuine documents, gathered in a field study carried out from December 1987 to January 1989. Mysterious voices also chime in and, drawing from time to time on the privileges of prosopopoeia, allow Aramis to speak." Aramis, the system, identifies itself with Frankenstein's monster, bewailing his abandonment by Victor Frankenstein. Latour's book is intended to reverse the meaning of Mary Shelley's, so that the real crime is not tampering impiously with nature, but abandoning the monster. Latour asks us to give up our fuddy-duddy prejudices and imagine a world in which nature provides no constraints on human activity, suggesting that no crazy scheme should be abandoned. 7 In fact, he wants to eradicate nature as a category. The earth appears only in the repeated contemptuous references to the "beet fields" near the Orly airport where Aramis was being planned. And the novelist attempts to dissolve the barrier between the human being and the machine, the living and the manufactured. The author's purpose is to enlighten "our intellectual universe, from which we have in effect eradicated all technology. In this universe, people who are interested in the souls of machines are severely punished by being isolated in their own separate world, the world of engineers, technicians, and technocrats." Were I to decide the fate of people interested in the souls of machines, they would be isolated in a separate ward of the mental hospital. Latour suggests that machines are the basis of an alternative religion: "they are the scapegoats of a new religion of Silence, as complex and pious as our religion of Speech. What exegesis will have to be invented to provide commentary on the Silence of machines?" He begs us to think of Aramis not as a plan for a machine, but as "an instituted object, quasi-object, quasi-subject, a thing that possesses body and soul indissolubly." 8 This nonsense would not be worth discussing if I did not believe that Latour may provide clues to what I have always found the most difficult puzzle of the poststructuralist phenomenon: why do people like it? Demons cannot enter the mind unbidden: even Count Dracula must ask his victims to enter his castle freely. Late in the novel Latour suggests some reasons for the appeal of post structuralism: "Thanks to computers, we now know that there are only differences of degree between matter and texts .... In fact, ever since a literary happy few started talking about 'textual machines' in connection with novels, it has been perfectly natural for machines to become texts written by novelists who are as brilliant as they are anonymous." Post structuralism has flattered the vanity of English professors, as Milton's Satan flattered the vanity of Eve, encouraging them to think of themselves as intellectual revolutionaries. 9 The essays in the second half of Beyond Poststructuralism, which are supposed to reaffirm the value of reading literature, also display far too much willingness to compromise with poststructuralism. Essayist after essayist avoids mentioning any particular work of literature, but attempts to establish, on purely theoretical grounds, the reasons why we might want to try taking literature seriously again. Only one of these is really moving, Virgil Nemoianu's "Literary History: Some Roads Not Yet Taken." The echo of Frost's beloved poem tells us right away that this writer cares about literature; he also cares about history and wants to bring back genuine literary history like that of scholars in the past. Like Searle, Nemoianu dares to use the word fact, derided by those who call everything a cultural construction; he also uses the forbidden words/ove, gratitude, and praise as he suggests that we once again embrace literature as a source of wisdom and joy. And like Searle he knows something about "intuitive and 'irrational' reactions ... based upon thick and multifarious internal processing" the mind that is inseparable from our bodily selves. 10 The intuitive, irrational, imaginative, whole human being"”another category dismissed by poststructuralists"”is the subject of the final and finest essay in the second half of the book, Martha Nussbaum's "The Literary Imagination in Public Life," a beautiful reading of Hard Times as a lesson in the wisdom that no public servant should be allowed to forget. Unlike any of the other writers, Nussbaum repeatedly uses the word life as the standard of truth and value try finding that word in any poststructuralist text!. Mr. Gradgrind's educational theories are bad because they are false to life; Dickens's novel is good because it offers a vision of life that includes reason and imagination, soul and body. Nussbaum, like Searle, comes from a field outside English: she is a professor of law and philosophy. Unlike the English professors whose essays make up the majority of Beyond Poststructuralism, these two have the courage to say that poststructuralism is wrong and that literature is rooted in life. Too many English professors have been listening so respectfully to such people as Bruno Letour and such theories as "computo ergo sum" that they have lost their nerve and acquiesced in the refusal of poststructuralism to acknowledge life as a meaningful term of value. Our whole profession should remember Paulina's words in The Winter's Tale: "Dear life redeems you." Dear life, our biological life on earth, must become the standard of truth if we are to redeem literary studies from post structuralism without relying on blind faith and miracles. 7 Life is certainly a standard of value in Minutes of the Lead Pencil Club: Pulling the Plug on the Electronic Revolution, edited by Bill Henderson. This collection of essays, cartoons, poems, and snippets from newspapers is breezy and informal. The forty essays are all short, and as far as I can tell, none is by a literary critic. Poets and essayists"”Gary Snyder and Wendell Berry"”contribute; so do the humorists Russell Baker and Dave Barry and the novelists E. Annie Proulx and John Updike. The book has one clear theme: enslavement to computers is taking us out of the natural world, away from face-to-face and voice-to-voice connections with our friends and our families. Some of the essays also decry the expense of computers, the planned obsolescence that forces people to keep buying "upgrades" so that they will not be stuck with unusable machines. More clearly than anyone else Wendell Berry warns that computers are one more link between us and the power companies that are destroying the earth for their own profit. Mark Slouka's "Rapture and Redemption in the Virtual World" is about the mad millennialism of those devotees of computers who proudly announce their imminent freedom from the body. He does not mention Bruno Letour, but Letour is one of their number. Slouka includes horrifying quotations from other famous professors Michael Benedikt, Bruce Mazlish about the promise of freedom from "the ballast of materiality," the possibility of being "angels, if not God" in virtual reality. The recent mass suicide of the Heaven's Gate cult of computer programmers demonstrates that what sounds like harmless lunacy in people like Bruno Latour is in fact deadly. When people start believing "computo ergo sum," their minds are open to all demons. 8< /p> The disdain for the biological world in poststructuralist theory and the disdain for physical labor that is part of the worship of computers cannot be separated. The supercilious contempt that poststructuralists feel for people who still believe a real world exists is only the most extreme and absurd version of the contempt that white-collar workers have felt for blue-collar workers and farmers ever since the Renaissance. Noxious plants with deep roots are very hard to kill; well-intentioned but half-hearted criticism of post structuralism and computers is not going to be enough. We need a deeper criticism of the falsehoods in our culture, a stronger knowledge that the reality of our life on earth must be the test of truth than the books by Goodheart, Harris, and Henderson offer. But this criticism and this knowledge do not depend on some great intellectual breakthrough, some yet undiscovered insight. If we could once again take literature seriously we would not have to look any further than As You Like It and The Winter's Tale, where the rich are forced to remember that their life depends on the poor who grow their food, that only fools and tyrants feel contempt for shepherds. If we can truly believe that the selfsame sun that shines upon Bill Gates's court hides not his visage from a cottage in Bangladesh, then dear life can indeed redeem us.  

Anthony Grafton and Bruno Latour may be considered as people of knowledge and education. They both were engaged in the process of knowledge acquiring and transforming it into their own ideas and new horizons of thought. For most aficionados, Princeton historian Anthony Grafton put the bon mot in...

Words: 2642 View(s): 136 Comment(s): 0
Examine the differences between the 'Hero...Examine the differences between the 'Hero and Claudio' relationship and the relationship between 'Beatrice and Benedick'. Throughout lessons we have read one of Shakespeare's well-known comedies, 'Much Ado About Nothing'. The comedy is well known for its tragedies, deception, mischief and love stories. In this piece of coursework I will be examining and comparing the relationship between 'Beatrice and Benedick' and the relationship between 'Hero and Claudio', the two central couples in Shakespeare's play. During the period when Shakespeare wrote 'Much Ado About Nothing', love and marriage was looked upon in a different way as it is today. In Elizabethan times it was not rare for arranged marriages to take place: especially within wealthier families. Marriage was often arranged between people depending on the wealth of both families. Fathers often arranged marriages between two people to gain more money, land or social status. In today's society on the other hand, marriage is mostly based on love between two people not what the families can gain from one another. In Elizabethan times there was a well known phrase called 'courtly love.' Courtly love was invariably adulterous, largely because upper-class marriage at the time was usually the result of economic interest or the seal of a power alliance. The courtly lover, who saw himself as enslaved by passion but fired by respect, faithfully served and worshiped his lady-saint. Shakespeare is well known for his plays apposed to his poetry. Throughout Shakespeare's comedies he often used comedy lines, love stories and tragedies. Shakespeare's comedies often resulted in a couple getting married. Throughout 'Much Ado About Nothing', Shakespeare uses a variety of language styles; prose, poetry, wit and imagery. The language is also particularly rich in rhetoric. When Shakespeare uses poetry throughout "Much Ado About Nothing" it does not always rhyme but is set out like poetry. We can see an example of this when in Act 4 Scene 1, lines 119-121, Leonato accuses his daughter, Hero, of being unfaithful towards Claudio. "Wherefore? Why, doth not every earthly thing Cry shame upon her? Could she here deny The story that is printed in her blood?" "Printed in her blood"; shown in her blushes of shame, stamped on her life. Unusually, 'Much Ado About Nothing' is written in prose, as opposed to blank verse. An example of this is shown when Dogberry, Master Constable of Messina, is talking to Leonato about the prisoners. "Moreover, sir, which indeed is not under white and black, this plaintiff here, the offender, did call me ass." Dogberry has a great opinion of him self but an imperfect mastery of the English language, meaning most of his speech is not correct. Shakespeare has most people wondering why he decides to write in a poetry style and in other places in prose. The most likely explanation for this is that higher status characters, such as Beatrice, use poetry in important and more dramatic scenes, whereas prose is mostly likely to be used by the lower status characters, such as Dogberry, in more comical and less important scenes. At the start of the play, Beatrice is keen to know weather Benedick has survived the war as she secretly care for him. "I pray you, is Signor Montanto returned from the wars, or not?" Here in Act 1 Scene 1, lines 128-29, Beatrice asks the messenger weather Benedick has returned from the wars safely but uses the name 'Montanto', which confuses the messenger. Beatrice coins the name, with obvious sexual innuendo, form a fencing term for a fencing term for an upward thrust. After Hero puts the messenger back in the picture he replies that Benedick has returned safely from the wars. When Beatrice hears the news that he is safe she disguises the fact that she was worried about the well being of Benedick as if she did not care weather he was alive or not. Throughout the entire play, Beatrice and Benedick, accompany each other in 'battles of wit.' This is one of the focus points of the play, showing Shakespeare's superb intellect whilst writing. Both Beatrice and Benedick both try to throw one another in believing there is no slight chance of love. Both Beatrice and Benedick vow not to marry. We can see this from Benedick as in Act 2 Scene 1, line 224, Benedick announces to Claudio and Don Pedro; "I will live a bachelor." He tries to fool them into believing that he hasn't any feelings for Beatrice. Throughout Act 2 Scene 1, Benedick is found, continuously, talking about Beatrice. It is now even clearer to the audience that Benedick has feelings for Beatrice. "But that my lady Beatrice should know me, and not know me!" Here Benedick refers to Beatrice as 'my lady' making me come to the conclusion that Benedick does love Beatrice. By continuously talking about Beatrice, Benedick makes clear his feeling towards Beatrice, but still tries to disguise the fact that he has feelings for her. Benedick adopts the appearance of being a male chauvinist and Beatrice adopts the appearance of displaying resent towards the male gender. Beatrice also adopts the appearance of being an unconventional woman of the time era with her constant out spoken behaviour and witty intelligence, which presents a challenge to all male characters in the play. The couple's background is fairly clear. We know that Beatrice and Benedick have known each other for a fairly long time. We can see by reading the play that they have a secret passion for one another but that they both fear to speak out about their feelings for one another in case the other does not feel the same way. Both Beatrice and Benedick continue to fight in 'battles of wit' to try to disguise the fact that they both feel the same way towards each other. Beatrice often wins their 'battles of wit'. I think this is because Benedick is sincere towards Beatrice and maybe even lets her win out of respect for her. As the battles continue throughout the play, chemistry starts to grow stronger between them both. As the play continues, the relationship between Beatrice and Benedick starts to blossom and finally results in the couple revealing their true feelings for each other. The couple finally pluck up the courage to do this with a little will power from other characters within the play. Hero and Ursula deliberately talk aloud about Benedick's feelings for Beatrice, so that Beatrice over hears. After over hearing the conversation Beatrice now feels she can also revel the feelings she has for Benedick, as she now does not fear the thought of rejection. "Taming my wild heart to thy loving hand." In Act 3 Scene 1, Beatrice revels aloud that she has feelings for Benedick. In Act 4 scene 1, Benedick now knows that the feelings are mutual. Now the couple have become closer, Beatrice springs a conundrum on Benedick to kill Claudio or lose her. In Act 4 Scene 2, after hearing that if he does not challenge Claudio to a fight and hearing the consequences, Benedick finally agrees to challenge Claudio to a fight. "I will challenge him." This now shows how much Benedick feels for Beatrice as he is more willing to kill his best friend than lose her. In Act 5 Scene 4, Benedick announces to Beatrice that he is in love with her, whilst at Hero's and Claudio's wedding. "Here's our own hands against our own hearts." Benedick carries on to ask for Beatrice's hand in marriage. "Come, I will have thee. But by this light, I take thee for pity." Benedick then waits for Beatrice's reply, which is "I would not deny you." Beatrice accepts Benedick's proposal and the couple finally get married. Beatrice and Benedick share many similarities. They both vow never to marry at the beginning of the play. The meaning of Benedick's and Beatrice's name are the same; 'the blessed one.' Another similarity they both share is their very high intellect. We can see from reading the play that Beatrice and Benedick are very intelligent as their intelligence is displayed in their many 'battles of wit.' Another similarity they both share is, is that at the beginning of the play their hate for the opposite sex. Beatrice and Benedick are also very stubborn. This could be down to the fact that they are scared of the idea of rejection. They both also try to disguise their feelings for one another through trickery but this does not last for long as their feelings are mutual and genuine. Their feelings are not only based on looks, unlike Claudio and Hero's relationship, but personality too. I do not think Beatrice and Benedick have any differences. This therefore makes the couple strong and a recipe for success. The type of relationship between Beatrice and Benedick was one of Shakespeare's favourite types to write about. This is because the couple are completely different from a conventional Elizabethan couple. It was not expected that couples would be out spoken about their feelings and thoughts, like Beatrice and Benedick display, and it was expected of couples to keep personal matters and feelings strictly between one another, not anybody else. Throughout 'Much Ado About Nothing', there is not much background between Hero and Claudio, one of the couples within this comedy, apposed to Beatrice and Benedick. This is as the couple only meet for the first time at the start of the play at the masked ball at Leonato's house, which happens to also be Hero's home. Claudio, an immature and naive character, falls instantly in love with Hero as soon as he sets eyes on her. In Act 1 Scene 1, he immediately starts to think about marriage and a future for them both. "I would scarce trust myself though I have sworn the contrary, if Hero would be my wife." This quote tells us that Claudio is willing to marry Hero even though he knows nothing about her or her personality, only that she is attractive. Also in Act 1 Scene 1, lines 147-185, Claudio has a conversation with Benedick about Hero. Claudio asks Benedick about his opinion of Hero. "Benedick did thou note the daughter of Signor Leonato?" Her Leonato asks Benedick weather he had noticed Hero and Benedick replies that he did but did not take much notice of her. Further on in the conversation Benedick asks Claudio; "Would you buy her, that you enquire after her?" Even further on in the conversation it is clear that Benedick does not find Hero attractive, whereas Claudio does. "In mine eye she is the sweetest lady that ever I looked on." Here Claudio is saying that Hero is the most attractive and beautiful lady he had seen in his life. This shows that Claudio is falling madly and deeply in love with Hero based on her looks and clearly not on her personality. Hero and Claudio's relationship experiences both magical moments and the worst and lowest points a couple could wish for in a relationship. The couple first set eyes on each other at a masked ball at Leonato's house, which also happens to be Hero's home. The couple do not talk to each other but instantly Claudio is sure that Hero is the right girl for him. People witnessing the play could either say that Claudio's feelings were 'love at first sight' or that Claudio was a chauvinistic male, judging Hero on her appearance only. Claudio instantly revels his feelings for Hero in a conversation between himself and Benedick. In the conversation they have Benedick can not come to terms or understand why Claudio feels so strongly for Hero. Unlike Benedick, Claudio revels and makes clear his feelings for Hero. The conversation between Benedick and Claudio is where the relationship between Claudio and Hero starts to develop. After revealing his feelings for Hero, Claudio does not know what step to take next so Don Pedro, Prince of Aragon, decides to help Claudio and offers to disguise himself as Claudio to woo Hero for him. "I will assume thy part in some disguise, and tell fair Hero I am Claudio. And in her blossom I'll unclasp my heart and take her hearing prisoner with the force and strong encounter of my enormous tale." This conversation takes place in Act 1 Scene 1 after Claudio has opened his heart to Benedick. Now the plan was arranged the relationship between Hero and Claudio, if the plan works, should result in the two becoming a couple. Although on the night of the masked ball, when Don Pedro is wooing Hero for Claudio, Don John 'the bastard' decides to interfere with the plan and makes Claudio believe that Don Pedro is wooing Hero for himself. As Claudio is a naive and immature character, he falls for Don John's trickery. In Act 2 Scene 1, Claudio speaks aloud to himself and feels betrayed by Don Pedro. Now Claudio believes he has no chance with Hero and that all hope of having a relationship with her has vanished. Further on in the play Don Pedro announces that he has wooed and won Hero's heart for him. "Here, Claudio, I have wooed in thy name, and fair Hero is won. I have broke with her father and his good will is obtained." Now in Act 2 Scene 1, Don Pedro has won Hero's heart for Claudio but not only that, he tells Claudio that he has had the approval off Hero's father for Claudio to marry her. This comes as an enormous shock to Claudio as he was fooled to believe that Don Pedro was wooing Hero for himself. Claudio is silenced by the shock of the new he has been told, but soon the news sinks in and he lets out all of his joy. "Lady, as you are mine, I am yours. I give away myself for you, and dote up on the exchange." This quote appears in Act 2 Scene 1. Claudio thought that he had lost all hope of being with Hero but now he has been told that he has her hand in marriage he is over the moon and shows that he is truly grateful for the opportunity. He express how happy he is and how he is willing to give his future to the marriage. This is the point of the play where the relationship between Claudio and Hero officially begins. All is going well between them and we do not hear much about Hero and Claudio and they are only mentioned individually a few times until the wedding ceremony. The ceremony does not go to plan. Claudio hears that Hero has been unfaithful and decides not to approach her with the allegations, instead leave it till the ceremony where he plans to announce it and embarrass Hero in font of the entire church. We can now tell for certain that Claudio is immature, as he did not approach Don Pedro about the allegations that Don John had told him and now he does the same to Hero. "Sweet Prince, you learn me noble thankfulness. There, Leonato, take her back again. Give this rotten orange to your friend." In Act 4 Scene 1 Claudio denounces Hero in front of everybody at the ceremony and everyone present seems confused and bewildered along with Hero. Claudio explains all and confronts Hero, making a big scene in the Church. "What man was he talk'd with you yesternight out at your window betwixt twelve and one?" Claudio revels the rumours that he has heard earlier in Act 4 Scene 1. Hero denies all allegations and appears in a confused state. Shortly after the confrontation, Hero faints and the wedding ceremony is abandoned. It now seems to the audience that all is lost between Hero and Claudio and word travels around that Hero has died. All seems lost until Act 5 Scene 1 where Borachio, a follower of Don John, reveals to Claudio that Hero did not deceive or be unfaithful to him and in fact it was Margaret at the window. ""¦how you were brought into the orchard and saw me court Margaret in Hero's garments, how you disgraced her when you should marry her." Claudio, now knowing the truth, feels full of regret and guiltiness as he now thinks he has lost the love of his life. Leonato then hears the truth and meets with Claudio and offers him the chance to marry his niece. "My brother hath a daughter, almost the copy of my child that's dead." Hearing the news in the same scene, Claudio accepts Leonato's offer. I think Claudio is still deeply in love with Hero and only accepts Leonato's offer out of mourning for Hero. In Act 5 Scene 4 Claudio prepares to meet his new wife to be. When the new bride unmasks her self it turns out to be Hero. This is a great twist in the play. "Another Hero!" Claudio is shocked and awaits an answer, "Nothing certainer. One Hero died defil'd but I do live, and surely as I live, I am a maid." This then concludes the development of the relationship between Hero and Claudio. They both finally reach the alter, for a second time, and finally get married. The wedding goes to plan this time and like many of Shakespeare's comedies, the couple are expected to lead a happy and fulfilling life together. After studying the relationship between Hero and Claudio, I have established the similarities the couple share. Firstly, I come to the conclusion that both Hero and Claudio are not confident people. Claudio does not have the confidence to talk to Hero and approach himself. Therefore, Don Pedro does the talking for Claudio. Hero displays her unconfident manor in a different way. She is conventional in the relationship between herself and Claudio and acts like what people expect of her. She displays the tradition 'Courtly love' throughout the relationship and displays all the actions a typical Elizabethan women was expected to do. Secondly, Hero and Claudio base their feelings for each other mainly on the looks of one another. Both want to marry at the start of the play also. Lastly, Hero and Claudio act more immaturely, apposed to Beatrice and Benedick. I cannot state any clear differences between the couple. When comparing the relationship between both couples there are similarities and differences. The main similarity and only similarity I can think of between both couples is the trickery used, resulting in both couple getting married. Beatrice and Benedick were tricked into confessing their love for one another and Claudio was tricked into thinking many things, although Claudio still ends up marrying Hero. There are many differences between both couples. Hero and Claudio's relationship is based solely on the sexual love they have for on another. They are mainly in love with each other's looks, making the relationship very shallow. On the other hand Beatrice and Benedick's relationship is much deeper, based on not only looks but also personality. Beatrice and Benedick's relationship took a longer time to blossom and the couple knew each other for a longer time apposed to Hero and Claudio's relationship, which only starts to take place at the masked ball. The final difference is that Benedick and Beatrice took time to finally confess their feelings for one another, whereas Hero and Claudio announced their feelings for each other straight away. Overall, I think both relationships will last but to different factors. I think Hero and Claudio's relationship will last but only on the fact that they have feelings for one another based on looks. I think Beatrice and Benedick's relationship will be the happiest as they have more solid foundations. They both have a lot in common; their views, intellect and history. I think the most secure relationship will be Beatrice's and Benedick's. I think this as their relationship is based on more than just looks. The feelings for one another seem genuine and when analysing the couple it seems to me that they are a match made in Heaven. Overall I think "Much Ado About Nothing" is a magical and superb play showing Shakespeare's gift for writing throughout. I enjoyed reading the play, as it did not fail to surprise me with its twists. I think it tells the history of Elizabethan marriage superbly. I enjoyed reading the 'battles of wit' that took place between Beatrice and Benedick mostly. If I had the chance to see "Much Ado About Nothing" in theatre I would as I think it would turn out to be a very entertaining and enjoyable play. Shakespeare's work did not appeal to me before reading the play "Much Ado About Nothing", but now after reading it I will have to re-evaluate my thoughts as if each play is as superb as this one, I will be reading a lot more of Shakespeare's works.   

Examine the differences between the 'Hero and Claudio' relationship and the relationship between 'Beatrice and Benedick'. Throughout lessons we have read one of Shakespeare's well-known comedies, 'Much Ado About Nothing'. The comedy is well known for its tragedies, deception, mischief and love stories. In this piece of coursework I will...

Words: 3580 View(s): 195 Comment(s): 0
We see them in public discourses,...We see them in public discourses, Filipino lawyers and people of the law expressing their opinions and rebuttals in English. We see them stored up in voluminous heights, documents of trial proceedings written in English. Our courts are alive with people engaging in the litany of judicial trials in English. For a layman who has no grasp of the motions of court trials, the experience could well be both overwhelming and confusing, not only on account of the case itself, but also on the awesome impact of the language being extensively used during the whole process. English, though considered the second language of many Filipinos and first language to some Graddol, 1997 continues to strike up controversy among sectors of the society "“ those who feel that our own 'national' language, i.e., Filipino, and therefore our nationalism are threatened by the widening popularity of English; those who fear that the underprivileged and non-English speaking litigants are deprived of justice; and/or those who simply could not and would not accept that there is such a language with absolute accuracy to equate to fair interpretation of law and therefore fair rendition of judgment. This paper intends to express a hypothesis that argues: "The use of the English language in the Philippine judicial system ensures accurate interpretation of the law and therefore fair rendition of judgment." As such, the paper hopes to show that the use of the English language in the law profession does not necessarily put the English language in a pedestal of absoluteness, nor its use deprive justice to non-English speaking litigants and nor does it follow that we lose our nationalism when we speak and use the language. History of the Philippine Justice System's Language according to the Constitution. The influence of the West, first the Spanish then the Americans, is ever apparent in the Filipino life. Governance of its people controlled and manipulated in the last 350 years since its independence in 1935 necessitates adoption of its colonizer's justice system. Juco 1969 articulated that Filipinos wanted independence but not many of them really knew what was going on when we were drafting our constitution in 1934-1935. The form and the manner by which independence was to come was left not to the common Filipino citizen, but to the more informed segment of the society "“ the elite. Thus, by virtue of the Tydings-McDuffie Act of 1934, the draft of the Philippine constitution patterned after the United State of America's constitution was began and to be completed the following year. In 1921 Sibayan, 1999, then US President McKinley instructed the Philippine Commission to use English as the medium of instruction in schools, which became the dominant language in several domains such as those in the courts of law, legislation, government, international relations, business and industry. The Philippine constitution has been ratified and amended in 1971, 1973, and 1986. Not much changes were introduced and though renamed and re-titled, the one single provision that remained unchanged is that one found in both 1973 and 1986 charters, under Article XVI, General Provisions, section 3 stating that "this Constitution shall be officially promulgated in English and in Filipino, and translated into each dialect spoken by over fifty thousand people, and into Spanish and Arabic. In case of conflict, the English text shall prevail." emphasis mine. Juco seemed to have succinctly expressed his wariness about how our constitution could have taken a different course if the Filipinos back then had been more vigilant, and literate, to insist integration of features unique to our culture. The more-informed segment of society, the elite comprising a minute population, was charged to make decisions and take steps toward independence for the whole nation. Why English? Much can be said about the seeming tolerance of the Filipinos to use the English language in defining its Constitution, much more in drawing the laws that govern the judicial system. In the eyes of the self-proclaimed nationalists, its proliferation goes contrary to the nation's aspiration of freedom, of acquiring a unique identity and of veering away from the shadow and therefore borrowed identity of its colonizers. But there seems to be veritably good reasons for using the language when it comes to the judicial system. Ma. Lourdes Bautista, Editor or Manila: the Linguistic Society of the Philippines Sibayan, 1999 wrote that language has domains and sub-domains and even sub-sub-domains. These domains have 1 human population or users of language, 2 support groups and structures, and 3 a tradition of language use. The language domain of the law has for its population lawyers, judges, and professors of law to name just three. Support groups and structures consist of law schools, law courts and the judiciary, the legislature, etc. The tradition of language use in law was Spanish during the Spanish colonial period but has shifted to English in the late 20's. Bautista continued to state that the replacement of Spanish with English as language of the law took roughly three decades, a relatively short time in terms of language shift and replacement. The replacement had not been difficult because 1 the population in the domain consisting of judges and lawyers and interpreters was relatively few and therefore manageable; 2 the law was readily available in English and books and reading materials were easy to procure from the United States; 3 law schools soon taught the law in English and it did not take long before these English speaking, writing, reading users of the language were able to replace the Spanish-educated domain population of lawyers and judges. Bautista offers that it is important to remember that the population and some extent the support groups and structure have to communicate with each other in a particular language game. The Philippine law uses English as its main language "“ and it is English of a particular register "“ sometimes referred to loosely as legalese "“ which the untrained cannot understand. This person, the untrained or uninitiated in the legal parlance, is practically an outsider. In the light of the foregoing, is it then enough that a person speaks English to go through the motion of litigation or make judicial decisions and ensure the rights of the people are preserved? I will again quote Bautista in her definition of literacy. She contends that one is not just literate, period. To be highly literate, read well educated, in the modern world, is to be literate in the following aspects: 1 literate in intellectualized language that is used as the working language in science and/or the professions, i.e., the language used in the domain; 2 literate in writing system; 3 literate in a register. Literate in an intellectualized language "“ for example English, Japanese, German, French, Spanish and Russian. Unfortunately while steps are now being undertaken to make Filipino an intellectualized language, it is far from being fully intellectualized to be useful as the main language for obtaining complete education. Take note of this last sentence which proves my point "“ Bautista stresses that Filipino in its present state of development cannot be used for teaching and learning the various professions such as those of science, the law, medicine, engineering, etc. However, Filipino is hoped to gain the same posture as the English language in the Philippines since it is highly supported by the government and there are many users that keep it alive. For the time being, it continues to be useful the area of creative writing, literature and the cultural arts. Literate in a writing system "“ for example Roman alphabet, Cyrillic, Arabic writing, Chinese of Japanese or Korean character. Literate in what is technically called register or sub-register- for example, the law and medicine have different registers, that is, even if the texts in law and medicine are in English, the lawyer may not understand a text in medicine and the physician may not understand a text in law, etc. Registers have sub-registers and even sub-sub-sub-registers, thus the law has sub-registers of criminal law, constitutional law, etc. and medicine has sub-registers of ophthalmology, neurosurgery, cardiology, etc. Senator Miriam Defensor Santiago interview, 2003, an authority in the subject of law being a lawyer and a judge at the Regional Trial Court of Quezon City for five years, and later having been elected into senate, believes that English, at this time, is the best medium for the conduct of judicial trial in the Philippines for the following reasons: · There are still many regions in the country where in addition to the local dialect, the only other language familiar to the town folks is English, not Filipino. · Filipino does not have the vocabulary for certain abstract concepts in law, such as 'intent', 'motive', 'simultaneous', 'conspiracy' and other key words that are extremely important in criminal law and civil law. · The medium of instruction in law schools is English. · The medium of popular TV, which is presumably the most accessible form of media for the masses, is English, Filipino or Taglish. If the language used by a TV show is Filipino, still the popular spoken form of Filipino is very far removed from the official spoken and written form in the judiciary. · Filipino judges and prosecutors were educated in English. All the reference books in law are written in English, even CD ROMS containing legislations and jurisprudence are in English. These court officers are periodically sent abroad to attend seminars, workshops or further studies conducted in English. Science has played a very significant and useful role in resolving issues of evidences presented to prove guilt or innocence of the accused. Forensic DNA analysis, for example, is now being widely used in the Philippines to aid the judicial branch in bringing the criminals to justice and exonerate the innocent Tagapamalita 2002. Since science uses the English language as it domain, its participation in solving crimes in a country that has an English-bound judicial system proves useful and complementing that which it serves. Standard or Formal English is the language used in public discourse Cruz & Quiazon 2001. It is characterized by the tendency to give full treatment to all conventions and elements required for grammatical sentences. It is taught, unlike non-standard or Informal English, which is spoken and written without formal studies. Non Standard English includes regional expressions that are associated with dialects. At this point, we could arrive at a consensus that Philippine law is a meticulous, calculated and strictly guarded language arena. As Cruz and Quiazon would stress, of all the professions other than journalism, law is the most word-bound and which demands from its practitioners much speaking and writing, requiring the correct use of words, phrases, clauses, sentences and paragraphs. I might add that this strict adherence to Standard and Formal English, and having acquired the literacy described by Bautista earlier, make the deciding judge capable, equipped and aplomb to interpret and render a fair judgment. Foreign grants help propagate and ensure development of the Philippine judicial system aimed at providing the poor the same legal aid that a moneyed citizen gets Asia Foundation 2002. To a certain degree, these foundations are the watchdogs of our judicial system, understandably so since they help finance reforms. Philippine law thus has become open to such reforms offered by international organizations necessitating adoption of developments that may be inspired by foreign culture to make it acclimate to international law. If not English, can Filipino be a good alternative language for the Philippine justice system and will it guarantee fair interpretation of law and preservation of our nationalism? Earlier in this essay, one of my resources Bautista in Sibayan 1999 said that Filipino, at its present state of development, unfortunately could not be used as a language register in Philippine law. That is a sad presumption. Sen. Miriam Defensor Santiago interview, 2003 offered her assessments regarding the three assumptions "“ language shift, fair interpretation appreciation of law and preservation of nationalism. The idea of Filipino being the measure of nationalism is an obsolescence that used to be valid in the past, but the argument lost potency because of the phenomenon of globalization. English is no longer just the former colonial language; it is now the lingua franca of the whole world, including such linguistically xenophobic countries as France, Germany and China. Sen. Santiago opined that to advocate that Filipino should replace English would be tantamount to rejecting an inherent advantage on the part of the English speaking Filipino people. Filipino may replace English in certain parts of the trial, particularly in the arraignment period and presentation of the litigant's own testimony, if the said litigant or the witnesses are not fully conversant in English. Sen. Santiago stated that during trial where she was judge, part of her fame or notoriety as she also described it as an RTC judge was her insistent use of the Filipino language in her court. She would make it a point that everybody in the court speaks in Filipino for the sake of clarity in pursuing the truth. As such, the adaptation of either English or Filipino as language of the court should depend on the particular circumstances of the litigant or any other witnesses. Here, it is made clear that Filipino is still widely used during court trials for the sake of the litigants. However, as the trial progresses into highly technical level, there is no point to make the litigant understand the flow of trial because he cannot understand any of it unless he has gone to law school. Concepts such as 'offer of evidence' or 'demurer to evidence' could not be plainly or simply translated into Filipino and make them comprehensible for anyone. The usual setup of individuals with trial roles in the court is this "“ the witness, interpreter and stenographer. Sen. Santiago recalls occasions with high points of hilarity particularly when the lawyers of both parties would not agree on the interpretation of a term from Filipino to English being given out by the interpreter for the stenographer to record in the transcript. These occasions do not only provide such comic interruptions but delays upon delays as the debate over which translation is 'best' translation goes on between the concerned lawyers. Sen. Santiago does not believe that the underprivileged, non-English speaking litigant is deprived of justice because the trial of his case is conducted in English. Litigants who are furnished a copy of any judicial document will be unable to comprehend the contents of the document regardless of whether it is written in Filipino or English. She further stated that because law is a highly technical profession and it is confined to a specific language thought, it is never a matter of common sense; this is a misimpression. If the reason behind the intent of using Filipino in the judicial processes of our courts is for the litigant to understand, by himself, the ramifications of the trial, then it is futile. You cannot be your own counsel. It is the same as patients self-medicating when there is a physician who can best interpret the actual medical implications of his condition. Law uses terms that are unique in the profession and therefore, no matter how the judge or the lawyers try to make the language as simple as possible, still it would be largely incomprehensible to the layman. This is why law takes four years on top of undergraduate school. It is the task of the lawyer and the judge to explain the flow of the trial to the litigant. Is it possible for the Filipino to English language shift to take place? Sen. Santiago said that this is most unlikely to happen because · To shift from English to Filipino in a complete turnover is disruptive and expensive for the State. We do not have the resources to finance the translation into Filipino of all the decisions of the Philippine Supreme Court. These decisions are collected into a series called Philippine Reports with 110 volumes, Supreme Court Reports Annotated with 371 volumes so far and the American Jurisprudence 2nd with 83 volumes. These reference materials that documented preceding classic cases are basic sources of any serious law office. They are like a stethoscope to a doctor or a slide rule to an engineer. They are so basic that any effort to turn over to Filipino necessarily involves the translation of these books to Filipino also. · This would mean that reference materials sourced from abroad such as decisions of the US Supreme Court, the British Courts and the International Court of Justice would all be translated to Filipino. While these decisions are not derived in the Philippines, they are very authoritative in the judicial profession. As a profession, the law is extensively dependent on precedents, whether here or abroad. Is our language truly that weak according to how scholars picture it? The answer to that may lie on how we value the language and its relation to our literacy and nationalism. Judging from the way our Education system has been pathetically treating the language since the time we were given our so-called freedom, we could see where our problem roots. In school year 2002-2003 DILA Philippines Foundation, Inc. 2002, there are almost 20 million school children enrolled in schools nationwide. Under former Department of Education's Secretary Roco's basic education curriculum, their instruction will begin to focus only on the five subjects of Filipino, English, Mathematics, Science and Makabayan. At best, this is hoped to improve the National Elementary Achievement Test NEAT scores of Sixth Graders, which in 2001 stood at a low 51.7% when the passing mark is 75%. How is this to be done? By lumping Geography, History, Government and Civics, Home Economics, Livelihood Education and Music and Arts in Makabayan for elementary; and Teknolohiya-Edukasyong Pantahanan at Pangkabuhayan, Edukasyong Pangkatawan, Araling Panlipunan, Edukasyon sa Pagpapahalaga, Philippine History, Asian Studies, World History and Economics for high school students. The mega subject, Makabayan Patriotism is thus to be taught in the Filipino national language. Reason? DepEd is of the opinion that Filipino is better comprehended by school children than any other language. Inasmuch as much of the NEAT questionnaire is written in Filipino, the DepEd hopes to raise average scores by intensifying Filipino instruction in the elementary level. As such, they are going to teach Filipino for the sake of teaching Filipino. Concern for education and literacy as Bautista defined it, is a thing of the past. Literacy rate by the time these children are old enough to understand their rights may not be ideally high. The statistics are quite misleading. In another plane, we boast of having one of the highest literacy rates in Asia "“ more than 90% Tan, 2001 but how much of that is functional? It seems we only like to see numbers and do not care to see deeply still to see how we stand as a literate citizenry. Tan defined a literate citizenry is one that understands the value of listening to all sides, separating fact from fiction. He further opined that as we become truly literate, then we become less gullible, less prone to being fooled by the gimmickry of ads and marketing campaigns or by the shrill and sterile rhetoric of politicians, and in the context of judicial profession in the Philippines, protect self against the circumventions of lawyers and incompetence of judges. Conclusion The English language is the best language to conduct judicial trials in the Philippines because it is the language that sufficiently and adequately sustains the requirements of law. The training, practice and enhancements of skills of lawyers and people in the legal profession are conducted in this language using its Standard/Formal form that requires extensive study and learning. The Constitution provided for this provision that in any case of conflict, the English translation of law shall prevail over our very own language. The Filipino language, though slowly gaining popular acceptance is not ready to replace English in this field. The language is limited in a sense that up to now, it has not provided a vocabulary for certain abstract concepts in law. Language shift, at this time, is not only expensive, it is likewise arduous and ineffectual considering the massive reference materials that also need to be translated in Filipino. The rights of the litigants plaintiff and respondents are guaranteed by the fact that the processes of the trials are clearly explained to them in areas where they need to be apprised of such intricacies using the language most familiar and comprehensible to them. The motion, researches, appreciation and evaluation of cases, or the things done in the back room Defensor-Santiago, 2003 that lie in the hands of the learned people of the law are conducted in English which acclimatize every rule or policy that qualifies them to make sound and fair interpretation of the law. Nationalism is not threatened because it is not the case in point here. The language that we speak does not measure our sense of nationalism. This is a controversial issue since we are still divided as to which dialect should be made the 'official' language of the country. Why Filipino if Filipino or Tagalog is to be made the national language considering that it is just one of the eight most spoken dialects in the country? This has undoubtedly become a source of division among the regions, which sees the choice as iniquitous and biased. DILA 2002 dared say freedom from Filipino means that communities are able to develop and market textbooks in the local language, promote indigenous art and literature, and discard the albatross of cultural inferiority. And if the community so decides to enhance the proficiency of their children in English, let them proceed without the hindrance of over-centralized authority. The time has come to no longer have a national language. More than the language game, whichever language we use, the more important aspect of the whole general picture is still understanding or literacy. This ensures that an active communication of truth, fair judgment and appreciation of facts according to what the law defines will be shared by all parties concerned, not only the ones writing, implementing or deciding the law, but also the one whose rights and destiny are being decided. We cannot compromise truth by insisting on nationalistic pride that is flimsily appreciated to start with. So far, the English language remains to be undisputed in this area.   

We see them in public discourses, Filipino lawyers and people of the law expressing their opinions and rebuttals in English. We see them stored up in voluminous heights, documents of trial proceedings written in English. Our courts are alive with people engaging in the litany of judicial trials in English....

Words: 3828 View(s): 98 Comment(s): 0