Julius Caesar. Plutarch's Lives. Autobiography. Literature Curriculum Iv, Teacher Version
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
0., R EPOR TR ESUMES ED 010 818 24 JULIUS CAESAR. PLUTARCH'S LIVES. AUTOBIOGRAPHY. LITERATURE CURRICULUM IV, TEACHER VERSION. BY- KITZHABER, ALBERT R. OREGON UNIV., EUGENE REPORT NUMBER CRP-H-149-47 REPORT NUMBER BR-5-0366-47 EDRS PRICE MF-$0.18 HC-$3.24 81P. DESCRIPTORS- *CURRICULUM GUIDES, *TEACHING GUIDES, GRACE 10, CURRICULUM RESEARCH, *ENGLISH INSTRUCTION: SECONDARY EDUCATION, LITERATURE PROGRAMS, *ENGLISH LITERATURE, *LITERATURE GUIDES, BIOGRAPHIES, INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS, EUGENE, PROJECT ENGLISH, NEW GRAMMAR, SHAKESPEARE, PLUTARCH THIS 10TH-GRADE ENGLISH CURRICULUM GUIDE WAS PREPARED TO ASSXST TEACHERS IN THE PRESENTATION OF AN ENRICHED READING AND STUDY PROGRAM OF SHAKESPEARE'S "JULIUS CAESAR," GIVING. SOME ATTENTION TO PLUTARCH 'S BIOGRAPHIES OF CAESAR, BRUTUS , AND MARK ANTONY WHICH SEAR DIRECTLY ON SHAKESPEARE'S FLAY. AN INSTRUCTIONAL UNIT ON "AUTOBIOGRAPHY" WAS INCLUDED WITH STUDY QUESTIONS AND WRITING ASSIGNMENTS DESIGNED FOR TEACHER USE IN -HELPING STUDENTS RELATE:THEIR OA LIFE EXPERIENCES TO THOSE OF PROMINENT LITERARY ARTISTS. THE STUDENT VERSION Cr THIS GUIDE IS ED 010 817. RELATED REPORTS ARE ED 010 129 THROUGH ED 01(7 160 AND ED 010 803 THROUGH ED 010 852. (JH) I ....WirfasweacommliPtIOWNIPPIIWIF r-- OREGON CURRICULUM STUDY CENTER u.remMapirOF 10-ALTH; MiCilf10,4 AND-WaFARE Office of _exttkitiot: ThirtioCument hat been reprodgcedlixactiy-as received from the peridn- or orphization orikinatihg it Points of view or opinions stated do not tiecensarliy represent official Officeof Educaton position or PM*, JULIUS CAESA R. PLUTARCH'S LIVES, AUTOBIOGRAPHY. Literature Curriculum W Teacher Version IP, vb. ...The project reported hereinwas supported through the Cogpeirative gesearch Program of the Office of Education, ifiepartment of Health,Educations and Welfare. 11:1ffitt2OrMICIE.L..u2IMIMIEW,,ITIZT=KIMEW'Tvelt failffartYMMIMi.T' 4,ksutplAWile4Ittng:S 4.14 Vr!4 4, -- ^' 41 .'..4:: .4 t 4.1 , Z' 1 , '4 $ 4`14 4:4 j 4, ' 1441 4. .4 tr 4.4 4 , r ' '4, 1444 5`, " 14,,;,',4 ',ow"; ". tr, 4, ' 4, . ttr;,,,-,4. 4', - '.,; $-,$4,'',; ) -$.",",'- ' '7', `, '' VN4,,44 m e.e e , ;. b . , l .e /VNe,..,......e ee . dO ., , ..... " f 1 1 ,.,:,. 1 . .,.. , , .. g , 4, ,4. , , , , . , ,0 , t , . 1 .,,, . "61 -. ^.- " ... *.'kt.: " 4' t .t, ?" ...... -4; -:.r-:." :.:-. :-. 4. '.....-,.,fil -f.. .'...t.--1..,..i-. z.:.`,, :- ,- --- ::.'.,.'-,, .....-.'-.''._,-,', i',,'-..'. :.s.,,..?-.-4,:;., ., :_. - ,, -2 M.L-3 111. slik) THETRAGEDY OF VMS C.AESAR CONI`E/iiTS' s 7,, 7-- : , - . -= ;* - * - ; bitrodactioxv:-.- 'ire' i is ft- aa r 7 :1"IdtAikrattiritlanalitetOry.e.: s 2 M.4TvgM! ., ... Cii,iiiiii,:* thellititi- cr' 4Sitiiiitan...., :'. , 4 , . ,4 . .Itiri The., -.au, iii: ,.,..; 1 K,, , ., , , -_ . ..,... , . 7.`.. 16-_W .., ...* _ . 0 5 PfrMPhisie1ActithrOtIOACCireSc. a internsL. o - I etvii:dratnat`- nter,roconflint , --ii- a' 1 ii. f s'::.III -- -.- -it . II,, . -. .., .. 1. * ti: a- 4. - . .e o ell in the 91,011114-.-at' a 4 . a 16) , 4e. i 19) -..t. FirittSimati:'' Sunitsery I 20 SeCtisd Phittie (Act Ilisc. 2, through Dn. 9 21 Cattiiithilial habit*"-. it _a 23) ( t h e f u n e 0.1.° h a l a l * : 1 1 1 24)1 Secotictlohase: Sitinnistry ip - 0 6 27 TbfrdPh9c : Acts IV aix1 V 41 28 Suountry (the Pky-sind the Clesettooin)- a 30 ' -C,,..4": .,e s , *, L.* , r ; .:1"-,,,4:31 I.Introduction: Julius Caesar and The Merchant of Venice Julius Caesar is the second Shakespearian play to be studied in our four-year sequence. In subject, theme, and dramatic treatment, it is radically different from The Merchant of Veniceread in the ninth grade, and some class discussion of the differences should give students an understanding, early in their experience with Shakespeare, of the many-sidedness of his genius. That "comedy" and this "tragedy" were, however, written by the same man. A problem, then, can be defined: although the plays are obviously different, in what ways is the mark of the man nevertheless on both of them? What traits of style or structure, what characteristics of vision, what psychological conceptions do they seem to have in common? The MerChant of Venicewas probably first acted in 1596, Julius Caesar iiirdgEtigie-Tars, including the great trilogy, Parts ri011, and Henri V,came between, the experience of wibff presumably maturing Shakespeare's art. Can students, then, find ways of supporting the proposition that Julius Caesar is a greater play than The Merchant Of Venice? Or willTirmy deny that it Lit and find reasons for thatOr will they prefer to say that perhaps Julius Caesar is greater but nevertheless not as interesting or enjoyable as the earlier Can a greater play be less interesting than one ulterior to it? What are the identifying marks of greatness? Who decides? The understanding such questions may lead to is an important objective in the study not only of Shakespeare bt2t of literature in general. As we grow In literary experience the concept of "appreciation" broadens and deepens. We begin with single works, trying to grasp each in turn, to understand and enjoy it. When we read a second and then a third and fourth work by the same author, our appreciation,: still of course rooted in the individual works, at the same time somehow eXtends to appreciation of the author. We find an almost bewildering variety in him: we begin to have some sense of the restless energy of genius, which constantly seeks new challenges, sets new problems, for itself Shakespeare was not one man, but Many men. Then we look more deeply and in spite of the differences see the similarities that unify the plays and poems. Shakespeare was not many men but one. Rea the plays in the order cif their composition, we may then come to ratand that they represent a growth, a deepening of vision and refining, of art that came with increased experience in his craft. Shakespeare was one mane then, but he changed, inatUred, like all of UI. But suCh., statements seem to assume principles of taste and judgment. So we try to define these prinCigiii, not so ranch in order to judge, althoUgh intelligent diSetirainitiOiriS but in order to sharpen tLs:714`,"te -2- appreciate* The dotrelopment ofprinciples of -tette isan empirical process. Standards are not handeddOWn frOm above Onsome prophet-- critic's Mt. Sinai. Theyare developed sloOny from the reading itself. experience of Such .propesitions and theirattendant questionscan be introduced early *the Study Of J r and putStiled, without forcing them too mach, to the eltd-of-it; citiraelveg shall return to themlater, Let us sows however,turn to another kind elf question,which is prompted by the subject of this plays, Literature and History Broadly conceived, the subjectof Caesar is politicidac on. The source ishistOry.The fire Beate the 1-3.2.--iuductory material in the Folger edition has thetitle, "The Appeal of Roman History, " and the -first sentence somewhatfancifully refers to the moment "when Shakespeare pickedup his Plutarch and began to dig Out material for a play about Julius Caesar, " What is thesignificance of this? The word histo itself may be given some preliminaryattention. When we say that thesource of the play is history,we may mean only that it is about something thathappened in the past, ina time hardly leas remote from Shakespeare'sage than from ours, Or we maymean that its source is PlUtarcb that IS,a wt.:ffile record of what happened in the past. Caesar was assassinatea-iii-44B.C.That is hittory in the first sense, Sometime afterthe event, Plutarch wrote aboutit. Ms essay on Caesar is "history" in the secondsense: historical writing. Historical writing isa special branch Of literature, In thit ninth grade,our students read Mark Twain's It, a partly 'true" account of a trip westward acrossthe Great and the Rockies the author made in theearly 18801s, They saw then that the ultintsite Source of book Watt Watery, the history ofthe great American migration akped the WestwardMovement; some of them perhaps catneto tUtderStand that what is Ciled "literature"may often be hardly separable from what is called "history. " In the tet* gradewe are giving same further attention to the relation- ship between And literature and to historical writingitself, We ett-CoUnter"historyin an early ferret inthe Odvas for *stance, when the bard.Demodocus "sinp of thegods and ep odes from the great war At- se tOr u, that * its '1414 as _t to ovilegir 4144. falthoug4 c:44rAe aa'sittate **tic A4te-t;'.itio AiAefructure, ofir.VOCeSE 0. ,a _ 0,In.this We are s100 reading tiogiiirtiiiiasi, representing liter*.x1-41400.094 MOOto w;litck fintarch probe* still the most fanantni &MI'S**, It seems tipproltriiite then,in 'C.-tilt:teak:6n With the -3- reading of Shakespeare's Julius Caesarto give some attention to Plutarch's workt least to those passagesirtliNbiographies of Caesar, Brutus, and Antony which bear most directlyand obviously on Shakespeare's PlaY It is probably best to do this afterthe study of the play has been completed, althOugh some studentsmay wish, independently, at least to dip into the Plutarch peleetions concurrentlywith the reading of the play. Two majoruses of the Plutarch material are recommended. First, In somepassages of the play Shakespeare days pretty close to the language of his source (in North'stranslation of 1579, of course). What differences of effect, then,between the prose of North's Plutarch and the verse of Shakespeare will thestudents be able to detect? Their speculations on this question should helpto sharpen their awareness of the special qualities ofpoetry. The second question is relatedto the first: how in a broader sense are Shakespeare's intentions in writing the play andPlutarch's in writing "history" similar, andhow are they different? Dowe feel differently abtxt Shakespeare's Caesar and Brutusand Antony than we do about Plutarch's ? Why? What,then, seem to be the basic differences- -or some of them-sibetween literature and history, bet-Jerin "tragedy"and history (since it).