The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 10.1945 Wednesday, 10 November 1999.
[1] From: David Lindley <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: Wednesday, 10 Nov 1999 11:42:22 GMT
Subj: Re: SHK 10.1917 Psychology in The Tempest
[2] From: Vince Locke <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: Wednesday, 10 Nov 1999 06:04:36 PST
Subj: Re: SHK 10.1917 Psychology in The Tempest
[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From: David Lindley <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: Wednesday, 10 Nov 1999 11:42:22 GMT
Subject: 10.1917 Psychology in The Tempest
Comment: Re: SHK 10.1917 Psychology in The Tempest
That Caliban and Ariel might be read as 'aspects of Prospero's mind' is
a view with a long history - Auden's 'The Sea and the Mirror' and the
film 'The Forbidden Planet' are but two of the psychologising spin-offs
from the play. The problem with such readings was put succinctly to me
by Timothy Walker, who played the part of Caliban in the
Leeds/Kelly/McKellen Tempest, and had previously played Prospero in a
Cheek by Jowl production. 'When I played Prospero I did to some extent
think of Caliban as a manifestation and extension of myself ... [but]
you can't as an actor [playing Caliban] play an extension of Prospero.'
There is perhaps a clear tension between the syntheses that readers can
perform, and the material, oppositional realities that actors must play?
David Lindley
School of English
University of Leeds
[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From: Vince Locke <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: Wednesday, 10 Nov 1999 06:04:36 PST
Subject: 10.1917 Psychology in The Tempest
Comment: Re: SHK 10.1917 Psychology in The Tempest
>Hello Everyone, I have a curiosity about the two slaves on Prospero's
>island. It seemed to me that Caliban and Ariel could be read as
>symbolic aspects of Prospero's mind. Sort of like the Superego and Id,
>though I don't believe those terms had been coined at Shakespeare's
>time. Nonetheless, I think that the idea of a basic human dichotomy
>would be acceptable. First off, is there any evidence to support my
>view, or am I just wandering off track>
>-J. Deman
I think your interpretation is rather accurate; check out the sci-fi
movie classic Forbidden Planet. Essentially, it's the Tempest in space
with "id monsters." Incidentally, the film contains the first
appearance of Robbie the Robot.
Vince Locke
Eastern Michigan University