The French Revolution Essay - 892 Words

Before the French Revolution, France was facing many problems, such as famine, high taxes, high food prices, and an absolute monarchy incapable of solving problems. In comparison to the nobility and clergy the bourgeoisie and the peasants were taxed ridiculously high. So clearly during this time we are getting the sense that the third estate carried the burden of repaying France’s debt. So because of this unfair treatment and their knowledge of enlightened thought, the Bourgeoisie sought to put an end to the classes and their lack of representation by forming the National Assembly. The peasants on the other hand were not driven by the same goals. When they did decide to revolt it was not for political or social reasons like the bourgeoisie†¦show more content†¦A few months later the National Assembly heard news about the army sent by Louis XVI, marching down to Versailles to disperse the Assembly. Fortunately, during the same time the peasants were storming the Bastil le out of anger towards the nobility, clergy, and monarchy because the Bastille was seen as a symbol of royal power. On the same day the Bastille fell and the army was distracted enough to no longer be a threat to the National Assembly. So the National Assembly not being threatened created the constitution, limiting the power of the monarchy and making France a Constitutional Monarchy and the National Assembly sovereign changes began being made. The Bourgeoisie’s construction of the Declaration of the rights of men reflected enlightened ideas, because it mirrored the enlightened idea of natural rights and popular sovereignty. The Declaration of the rights of men gave all citizens of France the rights of liberty, property, security and resistance to oppression (Declaration of the rights of men 1789). This was important because during the time first estate was exempt from taxes in addition to receiving money from the monarchy, and the second estate even though they wer e taxed regularly, had to pay very little. So essentially the Declaration of the Rights putShow MoreRelatedThe French Revolution And French Revolutions2006 Words   |  9 PagesAlthough the American and French revolutions both took place in the late 18th century, both fought for independence, and both portrayed patriotism, the revolutions are markedly different in their origins; one which led to the world’s longest lasting democracy and the other to a Napoleonic Dictatorship. Political revolutions in America and France happened because people felt dissatisfied with the way their country was run. In North America they rebelled against rule from a foreign power, they wantedRead MoreThe French Revolution And The Revolution1523 Words   |  7 PagesThe French Revolution was a time rife with violence, with many revolutionaries using extreme actions to overturn the French Monarchy and create a government based on equality and justice, rather than tyranny and despotism. This violence reached gruesome and terrible heights throughout the revolution, but was justified by the revolutionaries, who believed that their goals of total equality, the end of tyranny, and the return to a virtuous society, allowed them to use means necessary to attain theseRead MoreThe French Revolution And The Revolution1336 Words   |  6 PagesAnalysis The French Revolution was such an important time history. Not only was it a massacre with many lives being lost, including that of Queen Marie Antoinette and her husband King Louis XVI, it was also a time of great political turmoil which would turn man against man that being the case of Edmond Burke and Thomas Paine. Edmond Burke a traditionalist who believed the people should be loyal to the king against his former friend, Thomas Paine a free thinker who believed in order for things toRead MoreThe Revolution Of The French Revolution1040 Words   |  5 PagesWhile there were political and social causes of The French Revolution the most important cause was actually economic. A few years before the French’s revolution the French spent approximately 1.3 billion livres, 13 billion dollars, on the American Revolution. This gracious contribution caused trouble at home. The French Revolution was one of the most important events in history. While it changed the social structure in France it also affected many different countries across the world. â€Å"the treeRead MoreThe French Revolution And The Revolution1640 Words   |  7 Pages The French Revolution is often seen as one of the most influential and significant events in world history (Voices 9). The surge of rebellion present in those against the old regime, or Ancien Rà ©gime, inspired reformers for generations to come. Nevertheless, the French Revolution would not have occurred without the aid of the Enlightenment Thinkers, or Philosophà ©s. These Philosophà ©s’ ideas sparked the French Revolution. Prior to the French Revolution, France was radically different. It was theRead MoreThe French Revolution And The Revolution1321 Words   |  6 Pages The French Revolution The French Revolution was an iconic piece of history that help shape the world. It was a time were great battles occurred. Blood sheds happen almost every day. The streets were red by the blood of bodies that were dragged from being beheaded. The economy was in bad shape. But before all of this the French had a few goals but there was one goal that they all wanted and that was to get rid of the monarchy. This idea did not arrive out of nowhere, the commoners were influenceRead MoreThe French Revolution And The Revolution1223 Words   |  5 Pages French Revolution As the Enlightenment began in the middle of the 17th century, people began to use reason rather than stick to tradition. New Enlightenment ideas spread throughout Europe such as ideas on government. Enlightenment thinkers such as Rousenan believed that the best government was one formed with the general consent of the people. Other Enlightenment thinkers such as Voltaire and Montesquieu believed in freedom of speech and a separation of power within the government. All of theseRead MoreThe French Revolution And The Revolution1221 Words   |  5 PagesWhen people think of the French Revolution, they immediately think of the country of France and how the Revolution affected it. What most people do not think about however, is how the Revolution affected other countries, specifically the country of England. England was affected positively and negatively by the Revolution in that there was an increase of political involvement, but there was a collapse in the economy due to war declared by France. The French Revolution created a battle of conflictingRead MoreRevolutions And The French Revolution956 Words   |  4 Pages Revolutions are a common occurrence throughout world history. With the amount of revolutions in history, there are those that get lost and those that are the most remembered or well known. One of the well known revolutions is the French Revolution which occurred in the years 1789 to 1799. Before the French Revolution, France was ruled by an absolute monarchy, this meaning that one ruler had the supreme authority and that said authority was not restricted by any written laws, legislature, or customsRead MoreThe Revolution Of The French Revolution1636 Words   |  7 Pageswas an old fortress that had served as a royal prison and in which gunpowder was stored. This will be the place where Parisian crowds will lay siege on and use the gunpowder for their weapons, and this will become a great turning point in the French Revolution. 3) The Great Fear was the vast movement that the peasant insurgency of sacking nobles’ castles and burning documents would blend into. This attack was mainly because of seigneurial dues and church tithes that weighed heavily on many peasants

Romeo And Juliet Film Analysis - 879 Words

William Shakespeare wrote Romeo and Juliet somewhere between 1591 and 1595 and the tragedy, which was based on an Italian tale that was translated into verse in 1562 and prose in 1567, was first performed in 1597. Set in Verona, Italy, the story is the tale of two star-crossed lovers and has become a major trope within popular culture, so much so that it has been adapted to screen several times within the last century. In 1936, George Cukors version stared Norma Shearer as Juliet and Leslie Howard as Romeo and the film earned several nominations at the Academy Awards including Best Picture, Best Supporting Actor, Best Actress, and Best Art Direction. Critics found the film beautiful, but ultimately a missed opportunity because its two†¦show more content†¦The story, despite its popularity, doesnt quite age well, which is evident in the 1996, Baz Luhrmann remake. He released an MTV-inspired adaptation of the play entitled Romeo + Juliet. The film, which stars Leonardo Dicaprio and Claire Danes as its title characters, reimagined the tale to take place in what was then modern-day California but kept the original text. Roger Ebert gave the film a decidedly mixed review, saying that hed never seen anything remotely approaching the mess that the new punk version of Romeo Juliet makes of Shakespeares tragedy. [link: http://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/romeo-and-juliet-1996] Luhrmanns bizarre choi ce to modernize the setting but leave the dialogue is perhaps what makes the film so uncomfortable to watch. Still, Luhrmanns film just didnt quite seem indicative of actual 1990s teens, which in part has to do with the fact that the story just doesnt hold up in a more modern setting. Though the age-old tragedy has been told and retold and reimagined countless times, the archetypal storyShow MoreRelatedRomeo And Juliet Film Analysis1647 Words   |  7 PagesDavies, Anthony. The film versions of Romeo and Juliet, Shakespeare Survey 49(1996):153-162 Web. 22 May 2017. 1. In this Journal articles by Anthony Davies, he attempts to trace, compare, and analyze the play of Romeo Juliet’s life throughout cinema. To do this, Anthony does a close reading of four different films directed by Cukor, Zeffirelli, Alvin Rakoff, and the BBC. With these films, Anthony delves into them while dissecting specific scenes to compare how they are different or similarRead MoreRomeo And Juliet Film Trailer Analysis1803 Words   |  8 PagesFilm Trailer Analysis After completing William Shakespeare’s play, Romeo and Juliet my group and I were created a film trailer meant to reflect our interpretation of lack of love and fate in the text. Each member of the group took on specific responsibilities to add more depth and meaning to the trailer. One task I took on was acting as the Nurse and Tybalt throughout the production. My body language as well as how I delivered certain lines were used in order to convey certain emotions from theRead MoreRomeo And Juliet Film Analysis884 Words   |  4 Pagescentury tragedy, Romeo and Juliet, appealing to the audience during the time which it was produced. Hence it raises the question of how effective would Baz Luhrmanns 1996 film be as appealing to a 20th century audience? Luhrmann’s form of displaying the original play as a film, is a significant modern appropriation, as the audience can physically see the play unfolding, identifying the films effectiveness. By drawing on the original them es of violence and love, and introducing numerous film techniquesRead MoreRomeo And Juliet Film Analysis1458 Words   |  6 PagesThe portrayal of adolescence in film is a relatively new concept, and one that many directors have attempted in their career to varying results. Some directors are able to capture the awkward, bumbling phase of adolescence perfectly. However, there are some representations of teenagers that cause much debate, and can generally leave viewers confused about the director’s intentions. On one hand, a director can undoubtedly celebrate teenage culture through a variety of techniques, however on the otherRead MoreComparative Analysis Between Both Film Versions of Shakespeares Romeo and Juliet706 Words   |  3 PagesShakespeares Romeo and Juliet is the most famous love story of all times, and each generation needs a version of their own, which they can feel identified with. The same play can be interpreted in a totally different way, according to the m oral values, the relevant events and the point of view of the time in which it is performed. Thus, two films have been made, based on this masterpiece of English Literature. The first version was filmed in 1968, directed by Zeffirelli, while the second one,Read MoreWilliam Shakespeare s Romeo And Juliet1287 Words   |  6 PagesLizzy Baginski English Composition 2 Mr. Spera March 10, 2015 Romeo and Juliet Research Paper The movie Romeo and Juliet is a modern classic film that took place in 1996. Overall this is a timeless story that everyone should go and watch. This movie has an intriguing plot line that tells the story of two feuding families, The Montagues and The Capulets, and how the children of these two different families fall in love. The two children overcome various obstacles such as hiding their chemistry fromRead MoreRomeo And Juliet Essay1228 Words   |  5 PagesAubrey Bryan. In Romeo and Juliet. Drama for Students. Encyclopedia.com. Web. 04 June 2017. 1. Encyclopedia.com is an online encyclopedia that provides free information, articles, or references from various credible sources such as Oxford University Press and Columbia Encyclopedia. This online encyclopedia does not let anyone rewrite references or information which is what gives this site its credibility, as they make sure information is accurate before publishing. 2. On this online encyclopediaRead MoreDeath’S Kiss:A Film Analysis Of Baz Luhrman’S Romeo And1236 Words   |  5 PagesDeath’s Kiss: A Film Analysis of Baz Luhrman’s Romeo and Juliet Through history, dozens of renditions of Shakespeare’s classic tragedy Romeo and Juliet have been created by dozens of different directors, each with a unique twist on the play’s famous storyline. Baz Luhrmann provided an interesting angle to the story of Romeo and Juliet, choosing to depict it in the modern era rather than in early modern Verona. Luhrmann’s rendition of a particularly famous scene, the first kiss shared between theRead MoreAnalysis Of Mise En Scene And Cinematography983 Words   |  4 PagesAnalysis of Mise-en-scene and Cinematography Paper on Romeo Juliet Romeo Juliet (1968) was originally a play that was written by William Shakespeare, but as time progresses, plays became less popular and films became more popular. In 1968, Franco Zefirelli directed the film Romeo Juliet that was nominated and won fifteen awards. Some of these awards are two Oscars, three Golden Globes, and five Silver Ribbon Awards. Romeo Juliet is a romantic tragedy about forbidden love between two youngRead MoreEssay about Critical Analysis of Romeo and Juliet653 Words   |  3 Pages Critical analysis of Romeo and Juliet This paper will compare the differences between Franco Zefferilli’s version and Baz Luhrmann’s version of Romeo and Juliet. The story of Romeo and Juliet is about two powerful households in Verona Italy; these households have had a grudge with each other for many years. During their fighting some how the son of the Montegues and the daughter of the Capulets fall in love with each other, and the family doesn’t like it at all. In 1968 Franco Zeffirelli released

Elizabethan Playhouses and Performance Conventions Free Essays

string(53) " and the Lords were able to hear the actors clearly\." When Elizabeth became Queen of England in 1558, there were no specially designed theatre buildings. Companies of actors (usually small, made of 5 to 8 members) toured the country and performed in a wide variety of temporary acting spaces, mainly in inn yards, but also in churches, Town Halls, Town Squares, great halls of Royal Palaces or other great houses, or anywhere else that a large crowd could be gathered to view a performance. It is true that they continued to tour throughout Elizabeth’s reign (especially during the Plague in London, when theatres were closed or earned but little money). We will write a custom essay sample on Elizabethan Playhouses and Performance Conventions or any similar topic only for you Order Now Nevertheless, given the laws passed by the Queen to control wandering beggars and vagrants – which implicitly affected the acting companies as well – many actors were encouraged to settle down with permanent bases in London. The first permanent theatres in England were old inns which had been used as temporary acting areas when the companies had been touring. E. g. The Cross Keys, The Bull, The Bel Savage, The Bell – all originally built as inns. Some of the inns that became theatres had substantial alterations made to their structure to allow them to be used as playhouses. The first purpose built theatre building in England was simply called The Theatre, eventually giving its name to all such building erected in the outskirts of London and functioning until the closing of the theatres in 1642 during the Civil War. The Theatre was built in 1576, at Shoreditch in the northern outskirts of London, by the Earl of Leicester’s Men who were led by James Burbage, a carpenter turned actor. It seems that the design of The Theatre was based on that of bull-baiting and bear-baiting yards (as a matter of fact, bull baiting, bear baiting and fencing shows were very popular by that time, and they were often organized before the plays started. ). The Theatre was followed the next year (1577) by The Curtain, in 1587 by The Rose and in 1595 by The Swan (to mention but the most famous theatres). In 1599, a dispute over the land on which The Theatre stood determined Burbage’s sons to secretly tear down the building and carry away the timber to build a new playhouse on the Bankside which they names The Globe. By this time, the Burbages had become members of Lord Chamberlain’s Company, along with William Shakespeare, and The Globe is famously remembered as the theatre in which many of Shakespeare’s plays were first performed. (The Globe was destroyed in 1613 in a fire caused by the sparks of a cannon fired during the performance of Shakespeare’s Henry VIII. Rebuilt, it was closed and demolished in 1644 during the Civil War. The modern reconstruction of Shakespeare’s Globe Theatre in London was completed in 1997. ) Before going into more details regarding the structure of the Elizabethan theatre, distinction should be made, however, between two categories of playhouses: the public (outdoor) theatres and the private (indoor) theatres. The former were amphitheatre buildings open to the air and therefore cheaper – The Globe, for instance, charged two pence for a seat in the galleries or a single penny to stand in the yard. The latter (e. g. Blackfriars; The Cockpit) were built to a hall design in enclosed and usually rectangular buildings more like the theatres we know today. They had amore exclusive audience since they charged considerably more – the cheapest seat in a private theatre cost sixpence. The adult companies did not start to use the private hall theatres until after Elizabeth’s death, but they were used by the boy companies (made up entirely of child and teenage actors) in Elizabeth’s reign and were used by Shakespeare’s Company – by this time the King’s Men – and other adult companies in the Jacobean period. Structure and Design of Public/ Outdoor Theatres Public theatres were polygonal – hexagonal outside and round inside (â€Å"a wooden O† as Shakespeare puts it in Henry V). An open-air arena – called â€Å"pit† or â€Å"yard† – had, at one end, a wooden stage supported by large pillars, with trap doors for special effects (to allow ghosts, devils and similar characters to be raised up) and was surrounded by three tiers of roofed galleries (thatched, later on tiled roofs) with balconies, overlooking the back of the stage. The rear stage was covered by a roof – which they called â€Å"Heavens† through which, by means of ropes, they ould lower down the actors playing the gods/ angels, etc. , for flying or dramatic entrances – held up by massive pillars and obstructing the view of audience members from various angles. The stage wall behind these pillars was called â€Å"Frons Scenae† (taken from the name given by Imperial Rome to the stage walls of their amphitheatres ) provided with doors to the left and to the right and a curtained central doorway – referred to as the â€Å"discovery space† – which allowed characters to be suddenly revealed or a play within a play to be acted. The rear wall of this inner stage was covered by tapestry, the only usual â€Å"scenery† used on the stage. Immediately above the inner stage, there was the stage gallery which could be used for multiple purposes: – as an acting space: on either sides, there were bow-windows used for the frequent window/ balcony scenes (e. g. Romeo and Juliet). Thus the arrangement of a front stage and two-storeyed back stage permitted three actions to go on simultaneously and a life-like parallelism of events. – another part of the gallery could be used as a music-room. Music was an extra effect added in the 1600’s. The musicians started playing an hour before the beginning of the play and also played at appropriate moments throughout the performance. – when necessary, some of the boxes of the stage gallery were used for audience seating. They were referred to as the â€Å"Lord’s rooms† and considered the best (and hence the most expensive) seats in the ‘house’ despite the poor view of the back of the actors. (Nevertheless, the audience at large would have a good view of the Lords and the Lords were able to hear the actors clearly. You read "Elizabethan Playhouses and Performance Conventions" in category "Essay examples" There were also additional balconies on the left and right of the â€Å"Lord’s rooms† called the â€Å"Gentlemen’s rooms†, also meant for the rich patrons of the theatres. As previously mentioned, the stage wall structure contained two doors (at least) leading to a small structure, back stage, called the â€Å"Tiring House† used by actors to dress, prepare and wait offstage. Above the stage gallery, there is a third storey connected with the â€Å"Heavens† extending forward from the tiring-house over the rear part of the stage, which was often used to represent the walls of a castle or a city. Last but not least, on top of this structure, there was also what might be called a fourth storey of the tiring-house, referred to as the â€Å"Hut† presumably used as a storage space and housing suspension gear for flying effects, while the third storey stage cover served as a loading room for players preparing to ‘fly’ down to the stage. On top of the â€Å"hut†, a flag (a black one, if it was a tragedy, a white one, if it was a comedy, or a red one, if it was a history) was erected to let the world know a play was to be performed that day. The access to the playhouse was ensured by one main entrance, where playgoers had to put the admission fee – i. e. 1 penny, for those who watched the play from the yard, standing, called the â€Å"Groundlings† (shopkeepers, craftsmen, apprentices), or more, up to 4-5 pence for the gentry and the great lords sitting in the galleries. The galleries could be reached by the two sets of stairs in the structure, on either side of the theatre. The first gallery would cost another penny in the box which was held by a collector (â€Å"gatherer†) at the front of the stairs. The second gallery would cost another penny. At the start of the play, after collecting money from the audience, the admission collectors put the boxes in a room backstage, called the â€Å"box office. † The Players There were invariably many more parts than actors. Elizabethan Theatre, therefore, demanded that an actor be able to play numerous roles and make it obvious to the audience by changes in his acting style and costume that he was a new person each time. When the same character came on disguised (as, for example, many of Shakespeare’s female characters disguise themselves as boys – e. . The Merchant of Venice or Twelfth Night) speeches had to be included making it very clear that this was the same character in a new costume, and not a completely new character. All of the actors in an Elizabethan Theatre company were male (which might explain the scarcity of female roles in Elizabethan drama). There were laws in England against women acting onstage and English travellers abroad were amused and amazed by the strange customs of Continental European countries that allowed women to play female roles. Exceptions : One woman – Mary Frith, better known as Moll Cutpurse – was arrested in the Jacobean period for singing and playing instruments onstage during a performance of a play about her life (Middleton and Dekker’s The Roaring Girl) and some suggest that she may actually have been illegally playing herself in the performance, and women sometimes took part in Court Masques (a very stylised and spectacular sort of performance for the Court, usually dominated by singing and dancing), but otherwise English women had no part in the performance of Elizabethan plays. The male actors who played female parts have traditionally been described as â€Å"Boy Actors† – they were actually boys whose voices had not changed. The rehearsal and performance schedule that Elizabethan Players followed was intense and demanding. Unlike modern theatres, where a successful play can run for years at a time, Elizabethan theatres normally performed six different plays in their six day week, and a particularly successful play might only be repeated once a month or so. For example, in a typical season, a theatrical company could perform thirty-eight different plays. The Elizabethan actor did not have much time, therefore, to prepare for each new play, and must have had to learn lines and prepare his blocking largely on his own and in his spare time – probably helped by the tendency of writers to have particular actors in mind for each part, and to write roles which were suited to the particular strengths and habits of individual actors. There were few formal rehearsals for each play and no equivalent of the modern Director (although presumably the writer, theatre managers, and the most important actors – who owned shares in the theatre company – would have given some direction to other actors). Instead of being given full scripts, each actor had a written â€Å"part†, a long scroll with nothing more than his own lines and minimal cue lines (the lines spoken by another actor just before his own) to tell him when to speak – this saved on the laborious task of copying out the full play repeatedly by hand. There was a bookholder or prompter who held a complete script and who helped actors who had forgotten their lines. Costumes, Scenery and Effects Elizabethan costuming seems to have been a strange combination of what was (for the Elizabethans) modern dress, and costumes which – while not being genuinely historically or culturally accurate – had a historical or foreign flavour. Strict laws were in force about what materials and types of clothes could be worn by members of each social class – laws which the actors were allowed to break onstage – so it would be immediately obvious to the Elizabethan audience that actors wearing particular types of clothes were laying people of particular backgrounds and types. The colours were also carefully chosen so as to suggest: red – blood; black – gloom, evil; yellow – sun; white – purity; scarlet – doctor; gray – friar; blue – serving men. Extensive make-up was almost certainly used, particularly for the boys playing female parts and with dark make-up on the face and hands for actors playing â€Å"blackamoors† or â€Å"Turks†. There were also conventions for playing a number of roles – some of which we know from printed play scripts. Mad women, like Ophelia, wore their hair loose and mad people of both sexes had disordered clothing. Night scenes were often signalled by characters wearing nightdresses (even the Ghost of Hamlet’s father appears in his nightgown, when Hamlet is talking with his Mother in her chamber). The Elizabethans did not use fixed scenery or painted backdrops of the sort that became popular in the Victorian period – hence the playwrights had to provide the actors with spoken descriptions of landscape which with Shakespeare represent memorable poetry. That does not mean, however, that the Elizabethans performed on a completely bare stage. A wide variety of furniture and props were brought onstage to set the scene as necessary – ranging from simple beds, tables, chairs and thrones to whole trees, grassy banks, prop dragons, an unpleasant looking cave to represent the mouth of hell, and so forth. Death brought out a particular ingenuity in Elizabethan actors and they apparently used copious quantities of animal blood, fake heads and tables with holes in to stage decapitations. Heads, hands, eyes, tongues and limbs were dramatically cut off onstage, and probably involved some sort of blood-drenched stage trick. A number of other simple special effects were used. Real cannons and pistols (loaded with powder but no bullet) were fired off when ceremonial salutes or battles were required. Thunder was imitated by rolling large metal cannon balls backstage or by drumming, while lightning was imitated by fireworks set off in the â€Å"heavens† above the stage. One thing that Elizabethan theatres almost completely lacked was lighting effects. In the outdoor theatres, like the Globe, plays were performed from two o’clock until about four or four thirty in the afternoon (these were the times fixed by law, but plays may sometimes have run for longer) in order to take advantage of the best daylight (earlier or later performances would have cast distracting shadows onto the stage). Evening performances, without daylight, were impossible. In the hall theatres, on the other hand, the stages were lit by candlelight – which forced them to hold occasional, probably musical, breaks while the candles were trimmed and tended or replaced as they burned down. Elizabethan actors carried flaming torches to indicate that a scene was taking place at night, but this would have made little difference to the actual lighting of the stage, and spectators simply had to use their imagination. The nearest that the Elizabethans came to lighting effects were fireworks, used to imitate lightening or magical effects. Performance Techniques We know very little, unfortunately, about how Elizabethan actors actually played their roles. Performances probably ran continuously without any sort of interval or Act Breaks. Occasionally music may have been played between Acts or certain scenes, but scholars think this was quite unusual except in the hall playhouses, where candles had to be trimmed and replaced between Acts. We do not even know how long Elizabethan plays usually ran. The law (mentioned above) expected plays to last between two and two and a half hours, but some plays – such as Hamlet, which in modern times runs for more than four hours – seem much too long to have been performed in such a short time. What props and scenery there were in the Elizabethan Theatre were probably carried on and off while the scenes continued, while actors were continually moving forward and backward into the midst of the surrounding audience. All entrances and exits were through the doors at the rear of the stage proper: one actor left through one door while a second actor would appear through the second door to swing into the next scene. That means that there would have been no need to wait for scene changes. The actors were kept in constant motion and, given the design of the stage, they had to face in as many different directions as possible during a scene. Another aspect of Elizabethan performance that we know a little about was the use of clowns or fools. Shakespeare complains in Hamlet about the fact that the fool often spoke a great deal that was not included in his script, and in the early Elizabethan period especially it seems to have been normal for the fool to include a great deal of improvised repartee and jokes in his performance, especially responding to hecklers in the audience. At the end of the play the Elizabethan actors often danced, and sometimes the fool and other comic actors would perform a jig – which could be anything from a simple ballad to a quite complicated musical play, normally a farce involving adultery and other bawdy topics. Some time was apparently put aside for the fool to respond to challenges from the audience – with spectators inventing rhymes and challenging the fool to complete them, asking riddles and questions and demanding witty answers, or simply arguing and criticising the fool so that he could respond. With no modern stage lighting to enhance the actors and put the audience into darkness, Globe audience members could see each other exactly as well as they could see the performers and the Groundlings in particular were near enough to the stage to be able to touch the actors if they wanted to and the front row of the Groundlings routinely leaned their arms and heads onto the front of the stage itself. The Groundlings were also forced to stand for two or three hours without much movement, which encouraged short attention spans and a desire to take action rather than remain completely immobile. This means that the Groundlings frequently shouted up at the actors or hissed the villains and cheered the goodies. Elizabethan audiences seem to have been very responsive in this way – as their interactions with the Fool suggests – and were particularly well known for hurling nut shells and fruit when they disliked an actor or a performance. The Elizabethan audience was still more distracted, however, since beer and food were being sold and consumed throughout the performance, prostitutes were actively soliciting for trade, and pickpockets were busy stealing goods as the play progressed. Elizabethan audiences may have â€Å"viewed† plays very differently, hence the origin of the word â€Å"audience† itself. The Elizabethans did not speak of going to see a play, they went to hear one – and it is possible that in the densely crowded theatre – obstructed by the pillars and the extravagant headgear that richer members of the audience were wearing – the Elizabethan audience was more concerned to hear the words spoken than to be able to see the action. This idea is given extra weight by the fact that in the public outdoor theatres, like the Globe, the most expensive seats were not the ones with the best views (in fact the best view is to be had by the Groundlings, standing directly in front of the stage), but those which were most easily seen by other audience members. The most expensive seating was in the Lord’s box or balcony behind the stage – looking at the action from behind – and therwise the higher the seats the more an audience member had to pay. (Some Elizabethan documents suggest that the reason for this range of prices was the richer patron’s desire to be as far from the stink of the Groundlings as possible. ) Specific aspects of Elizabethan performances: bear-baiting: three bears in ascending size are set upon by an English hound in a fight to the death! fencing: less gruesome, this civilized sport also took place before plays. umb-shows/processions: parades or spectacles, these formal groups used all the most ornate costumes they owned, including crowns and sceptres, torches and swords. Dumbshows appeared at the end of each act to summarize the events of the following act. By the turn of the century, dumb-shows were considered old-fahsioned and corny. Processions were more solemn as actors moved mannequin-like across the stage. jigs: at the conclusion of a play, the actors would dance around the stage. Separate from the plays, these were bawdy, knockabout song-and-dance farces. Frequently resembling popular ballads, jigs were often commentaries on politics or religion. masques: masques were plays put on strictly by the royals. These were celebrations, i. e. royal weddings or winning a battle. Designed as banquets of the senses, these celebrations spanned several days during which each member of the party played a part in the allegorical theme of the banquet. Masques were always held in private playhouses. How to cite Elizabethan Playhouses and Performance Conventions, Essay examples

Comparison Between The Business Models Of Starbucks And Tim Hortons

Question: Discuss about the Comparison Between The Business Models Of Starbucks And Tim Hortons. Answer: The essay consists of a comparison between the business models of Starbucks and Tim Hortons, the leading coffee industries of Canada. The comparison has been done on many fields like the marketing strategy of both the companies, the acceptability of both the companies, the promotional strategies of both the companies. Both Starbucks and Tim Hortons are good in different spheres. Both the companies specialize in the food and coffee service industry. While comparing both the companies firstly in the field of distribution, it can be said that Starbucks has undoubtedly more and much wide range of distributors and they lay their focus more on the distribution of fresh food. On the other hand Tim Horton concentrates more on their beverages as well as foods like bread, dry foods and pastries. This is the first and foremost difference between them. Their distribution is different and the ways they are distributed are different (Voigt, Buliga Michl, 2017). The second difference is the license and the partnerships. In this context it can be mentioned that Starbucks uses a lot of licenses and partnerships whereas Tim Hortons relies much on the third party distributors and warehouses. Starbucks is better in this field. This is the reason they are globally spread and they have stores in many parts of the world. The third difference is that both the companies have different marketing strategies. They do the marketing in a different way. Starbucks prefers the technological applications such as for the iphone where a customer can use their mobile phone in order to make their purchases and it is also connected to the loyalty card that there in Starbucks. Apart from this the company uses the social media forum like facebook and online shopping to market their products. This enables the customers to have authentic conversation with the brand. Tim Hortons does not do their marketing so strongly in the social media. This is where the marketing strategy of both the companies differs (Pastoll et al., 2014). The other difference between the two is their place of distribution. Tim Hortons concentrates their distribution more in the eastern Canada. On the other hand Starbucks majorly focuses on the urban areas. In most parts of Canada Tim Hortons occupied a major position but in the global world Starbucks has occupied a good position and it is more famous in the entire world (Richelieu Korai, 2014). The pricing strategy of both the companies is different. Tim Horton can be afforded by the people of all the classes (Richelieu Korai, 2014). It is said that it can be afforded by everyone, from hockey moms to the workers who works in the construction sites. Everybody would be comfortable in ordering in Tim Horton. Starbucks can be labeled under high-rated coffee shops. The price is not convenient for all. They are not kept in convenient store. By analyzing all the executive business models of both the companies this can be mentioned that both the companies have excelled but the business model of Starbucks is more organized and advanced. This is the reason even getting launched after few years of Tim Starbucks made more name in the entire world and made the brand more popular. References Gassmann, O., Frankenberger, K., Csik, M. (2016). Innovation Strategy: From new Products to Business Model Innovation. InBusiness Innovation: Das St. Galler Modell(pp. 81-104). Springer Gabler, Wiesbaden. Pastoll, C., Rochwerg, T., Vlaar, B., Compeau, D. (2014). Starbucks canada: the mobile payments decision. Richelieu, A., Korai, B. (2014). The consumption experience of Tim Hortons coffee fans.Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal,17(3), 192-208. Voigt, K. I., Buliga, O., Michl, K. (2017). Globalizing Coffee Culture: The Case of Starbucks. InBusiness Model Pioneers(pp. 41-53). Springer, Cham.