0
Who is the hero in A Midnight Summer Dream by William Shakespeare. Also what are three reasons why with proof and evidence?
Wiki User
∙ 12y ago
A Midsummer Night's Dream does not have a hero. None of its characters are heroic or perform any heroic actions. In some ways Bottom is courageous in facing his fear when his companions desert him ("and I shall sing to prove I am not afraid"). Hermia shows a lot of spunk and Lysander would have been true to her if he hadn't been juiced. This means there is something to admire in these characters (and also in Theseus, Titania and Oberon), but that doesn't make them heroes.
Wiki User
∙ 12y ago
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
What reasons did William Shakespeare give for the death of Caesar?
the conspirators killed ceasar because he was ambitious
What are some reasons people would want to meet William Shakespeare?
Some reasons people might want that:He was brilliant and funny and deepBecause he was an expert with languageBecause they love his plays so muchBecause they might be a descendant and want to meet family
One of the main reasons why Shakespeare stands out from his contemporaries and predecessors is that his were complex?
Shakespeare's complex characters made him stand out.
Where was William Shakespeare inspire to write books?
Shakespeare did not write books as we would understand the meaning of the term--something written for the purpose of being published--apart from his two long poems. His inspiration for writing them was that the theatres were closed for health reasons, and he had to make money somehow. Venus and Adonis is semi-pornographic, which no doubt helped sales. Shakespeare made good money off of it.
Why have some people raised doubts about Shakespeare's identity?
Belief in conspiracy theories and other off-the-wall claims is a peculiar phenomenon. All of the information we have about the plays attributed to William Shakespeare suggests that it was written by William Shakespeare, gent. of Stratford-upon-Avon, who was an actor, poet and member of the theatre company The King's Men, famous for being the only one that put on Shakespeare plays. All of it. There is no evidence whatsoever that anyone else wrote them. Nobody even considered such a thing until 1850. Nevertheless there are some people, most of whom ought to know better, who claim that there is a serious doubt that someone other that W. Shakespeare of Stratford wrote the works of W. Shakespeare. The idea is that someone else wrote the plays but for some reason couldn't claim them as their own, and so passed them off as Shakespeare's, with the connivance not only of Shakespeare but just about everybody in the London theatre community of the day. One of the reasons why people do this is wishful thinking. What we know about Shakespeare suggests that he was perhaps not as exciting a figure as we would like him to be. That is why people made up stories about him being a poacher. Intellectual snobs were offended at his grammar school education. Aristocratic snobs were offended by his descent from a country glover. It would be so much better if he were a university man, or a nobleman of some kind. Likewise, the truth is that we have found out about as much about Shakespeare's life as we are likely to, and it is not much. If only he were some better-documented person, there would be some interesting research. For some reason, the phrase "if only he were" easily becomes "he must have been" in the minds of some people. Another problem that arises in the heads of all kinds of conspiracy theorists is the inability to understand that lack of evidence is not evidence for anything. I am not talking about evidence for a negative proposition: there is plenty of evidence for the proposition that the river Nile does not flow through Morocco. No, these are arguments along the lines of: there are no records that Philip II passed water in the year 1588, so therefore there is at least some doubt that Philip II urinated in 1588. Sorry, there's no doubt at all. The fact that there is no evidence of William Shakespeare owning books is not evidence for anything: it does not prove that he had no books, that he had read no books, or that he could read no books. The fact that the only authenticated examples of Shakespeare's handwriting are his signature does not prove that he couldn't write anything else. When you take away arguments of this kind, there is really nothing at all behind the so-called authorship controversy.
What reasons did William Shakespeare give for the death of Caesar?
the conspirators killed ceasar because he was ambitious
Did William Shakespeare do symphonies?
No, for two reasons. First, Shakespeare was a poet and playwright, not a musical composer, and second, the form of the symphony was not invented until more than a century after Shakespeare's death.
Does shakespeare believe in god?
His beliefs are in doubt as he is dead. There is ample evidence that he believed in a god when he was alive. Or gave that impression for professional reasons
Who wrote William Shakespeare's plays?
William Shakespeare did. The chances that he did not contribute at least something to all of the plays people attribute to him are infinitesimally small. The evidence is quite clear that: 1. William Shakespeare was a real person who was born and died in Stratford. 2. William Shakespeare from Stratford was a member of the playing company called The Lord Chamberlain's Men and the King's Men and was a close friend with the other members. 3. The plays which were published with Shakespeare's name on them were exclusively associated with the Lord Chamberlain's/ King's Men for as long as he was a member of that company. 4. William Shakespeare was depicted as a writer by those who knew him best within a couple of years of his death. 5. There is no contemporary record of any other person called William Shakespeare who could possibly be mistaken for Shakespeare the writer. 6. Nobody in the history of the world has used the name of a well-known living person as a nom de plume. Some think that Edward de Vere the 17th Earl of Oxford wrote the plays but there is no good reason to think he did and a number of good reasons to think he didn't.
How many sonnets did William Shakespeare did?
The volume Shakespeare's Sonnets [1609] contains 154 sonnets, so the usual answer to this question is 154. There are a few 'sonnets' embedded in the plays (particularly in Romeo and Juliet); but people don't normally include these among Shakespeare's Sonnets (for a number of reasons).
What are some reasons people would want to meet William Shakespeare?
Some reasons people might want that:He was brilliant and funny and deepBecause he was an expert with languageBecause they love his plays so muchBecause they might be a descendant and want to meet family
One of the main reasons why Shakespeare stands out from his contemporaries and predecessors is that his were complex?
Shakespeare's complex characters made him stand out.
Where was William Shakespeare inspire to write books?
Shakespeare did not write books as we would understand the meaning of the term--something written for the purpose of being published--apart from his two long poems. His inspiration for writing them was that the theatres were closed for health reasons, and he had to make money somehow. Venus and Adonis is semi-pornographic, which no doubt helped sales. Shakespeare made good money off of it.
Why have some people raised doubts about Shakespeare's identity?
Belief in conspiracy theories and other off-the-wall claims is a peculiar phenomenon. All of the information we have about the plays attributed to William Shakespeare suggests that it was written by William Shakespeare, gent. of Stratford-upon-Avon, who was an actor, poet and member of the theatre company The King's Men, famous for being the only one that put on Shakespeare plays. All of it. There is no evidence whatsoever that anyone else wrote them. Nobody even considered such a thing until 1850. Nevertheless there are some people, most of whom ought to know better, who claim that there is a serious doubt that someone other that W. Shakespeare of Stratford wrote the works of W. Shakespeare. The idea is that someone else wrote the plays but for some reason couldn't claim them as their own, and so passed them off as Shakespeare's, with the connivance not only of Shakespeare but just about everybody in the London theatre community of the day. One of the reasons why people do this is wishful thinking. What we know about Shakespeare suggests that he was perhaps not as exciting a figure as we would like him to be. That is why people made up stories about him being a poacher. Intellectual snobs were offended at his grammar school education. Aristocratic snobs were offended by his descent from a country glover. It would be so much better if he were a university man, or a nobleman of some kind. Likewise, the truth is that we have found out about as much about Shakespeare's life as we are likely to, and it is not much. If only he were some better-documented person, there would be some interesting research. For some reason, the phrase "if only he were" easily becomes "he must have been" in the minds of some people. Another problem that arises in the heads of all kinds of conspiracy theorists is the inability to understand that lack of evidence is not evidence for anything. I am not talking about evidence for a negative proposition: there is plenty of evidence for the proposition that the river Nile does not flow through Morocco. No, these are arguments along the lines of: there are no records that Philip II passed water in the year 1588, so therefore there is at least some doubt that Philip II urinated in 1588. Sorry, there's no doubt at all. The fact that there is no evidence of William Shakespeare owning books is not evidence for anything: it does not prove that he had no books, that he had read no books, or that he could read no books. The fact that the only authenticated examples of Shakespeare's handwriting are his signature does not prove that he couldn't write anything else. When you take away arguments of this kind, there is really nothing at all behind the so-called authorship controversy.
Why people think William Shakespeare isn't real?
There is evidence or lack of evidence that Shakespeare ever existed. Some feel that his works were written by someone else (such as Francis Bacon or the Earl of Oxford). It is known that Shakespeare did not invent the story of Romeo and Juliet. It was originally a plodding poem by Arthur Brooks. However, Shakespeare made it his own.
What should a philosophical argument involve?
Evidence or Reasons
When does shakespeare return to his hometown from London and why?
Shakespeare returned to his hometown of Stratford-upon-Avon in 1611 after retiring from the theater in London. He returned to live out the rest of his life with his family and focus on his personal affairs.
