Martius and Aufidius

Coriolanus is an ancient Roman historical tragedy written by Shakespeare in his later years. The theme is the relationship between the hero and the people. Martius (later known as Coriolanus for his war exploits) is a great warrior on the battlefield, but he is not good at in dealing with the people of his country. He is not a qualified politician when it comes to his relationship with the people. He himself, by virtue of his aristocratic origins, had been brought up to act and think according to the traditions of the aristocracy, believing that he deserved to be in the leadership, that the lower classes were the least powerful, and that he should be the only one who could be a politician. He’s from a noble family. Martius also had many good qualities in him, he was focused on honor, but did not like to boast. He was a valiant warrior, and did great service to Rome, but when elected to the consulship, he was unwilling to show his wounds to the masses! Or exchanged descriptions of his exploits for power. He was arrogant, but so purely arrogant that his reluctance to claim credit turned into arrogance in the eyes of the Romans, and he was indifferent to the populace. The gesture became a hatred of the people under the misinterpretation of the instigators. Thus the honor and power of Martius in the city of Rome began to collapse before it was firmly established. Martius’s bravery as a general was admirable, but his failure to handle relations with the public also contributed to his Important reasons for future failure. So a qualified general must not only know how to win a war, but also how to pacify the people in times of peace.

The people of Rome are portrayed in the play as ignorant and contemptible, and many of the Roman soldiers at the time of the attack on the city of Corioles feared death. Only Martius fought alone to turn the tide. When he fought his way out of the siege, the Romans loved him and respected him, but were foolish enough to turn their backs on him under the influence of the tribunes. The tribunes, fearing that their power would be greatly weakened by the accession of Martius to power, endlessly magnified Martius’ bad attitude towards the people. The people were incited to oppose his consulship against their previous will. By expelling Coriolanus, the Romans were surrendering their strongest shield to the enemy. And knowing that Martius was harbored by the enemy Volscians and given military power to take Rome over, the populace and tribunes of the city of Rome Without fail, they began to wag their tails at the man they had once banished.

Aufidius was on the same page as Coriolanus as an adversary on the battlefield, but as the central figure in both armies, both made the It is hard to sympathize with a valiant warrior who is dreaded by his enemies, even under the battlefield. When Martius came to join the Volscians in the Sabbath after his expulsion from Rome, Aufidius was able to put aside his former hatred and accept him gladly. On the one hand the heroes cherished each other, but on the other hand they wanted to use this war machine to achieve their long-cherished dream of capturing Rome. Afterwards, Aufidius was jealous of Martius’ growing popularity among the Volscians for his exploits in battle. When Martius’ family persuaded him not to attack Rome again, Aufidius was sure to get rid of him. There is some black humor in the fact that it was not the Roman people but Aufidius who understood Martius best. As often in life we feel that it is not our friends but our enemies who understand us best. But an enemy is not necessarily an enemy, and although Aufidius and Martius are rivals on the battlefield, they are not. Both sides felt respect, and it could be said that they were enemies as well as friends. This allows us to appreciate that we may be able to learn more from those around us in life, maybe that person is your competitor, but they There are probably a lot of good things for you to learn as well. For example, if Martius could handle his relationship with the Roman people as well as Aufidius did, then perhaps The end result would have been completely different.

The Poor Side of Virtual Theatre

Amid devastations felt by countless industries, the theatre world has taken a heavy hit from the COVID-19 pandemic. The livelihoods of small artists and theatre workers have tremendously been threatened by restrictions on show attendance and delivery. Measures have been taken to adapt—a common of which has been to record live shows and upload them online to provide at-home viewing. Unfortunately, this method cannot reproduce the full experience of live attendance—in particular, the experience of “community” that it creates.

An example of this occurred in The Unknown Island by Gate Theatre, a “grown-up fairy tale” about crossing “the vast differences between our-selves and each other” (as stated on the production webpage). It has a charming story focused on two characters—a man bent on finding an undiscovered island, and a cleaning woman who decides to join him. During their journey, they experience a deep connection that seems implied to be the “unknown island” that they were looking for all along. In this show, we see a unique deviation from the traditional staging style—instead of having rows of audience members all face in one direction to a single stage, this show has its audience encircle the actors, who use the entire space of the room itself.

Certain elements of the live experience—such as the dimensionality of sound, the feel of light shifting on our bodies, and the feeling that others are moving around us—were lost. Widely accessible technology has not yet reached the point of recovering these losses. In addition to the diminished entertainment value this causes, it greatly impairs the writers’ and performers’ abilities to convey what they intended from the performance. For example, could something subtle, such as the sound dimensionality caused by two actors delivering lines from a certain distance apart, have intended to produce a certain feeling or thought in the audience?
These live-exclusive elements are crucial for the audience to experience the performance as intended by the writers, staff, and performers.

I would also like to point out a more “abstract” impact of becoming a virtual audience member—in particular, the loss of the “collective experience of proximity” as described in Emine Fisek’s book, Theatre & The Community.

Fisek argues that theatre often creates a collective experience of proximity that many perceive to be a “community” being produced. She also argues that an opportunity arises to challenge the thought itself that this proximity is really a community. With that being said, I question whether this effect was created to nearly the same extent for me as it was for the live audience members. In my opinion, some elements that would have contributed to such an experience of collectivity were eliminated, such as watching the show from the same eye-level as all of the other audience members in the room with me. In the end, instead of feeling like a “fellow” audience member, I felt as if I was experiencing the show as an audience member of the audience members themselves.

Theatre Changed Me

Change is frightening. When there is a sudden change in my life, I like to pretend that everything is all-right, especially when things are outside of my control. The entire world changed when the COVID-19 pandemic became the headline of every newscast. We all stayed home, and social distancing altered the fabric of our society. Destination Theatre moved to a virtual world of ZOOM meetings and OWL lessons. My small office took the place of grand theatres and performances that I hoped to see in London, UK.

Watching Coriolanus on my laptop

However, Shakespeare’s tragedy Coriolanus inspired my passion. Coriolanus is an incredibly impressive Roman soldier who fights and defend Rome against its enemies. His strength and his military ability make him a celebrity. But the same people who love him for his ability hate him because he does not show his affection for them. The play shows that Democracy does not always produce the best result for people. 

The National Theatre recorded the performance in January 2014 at the Donmar Warehouse which presented a contemporary spin of Shakespeare’s Coriolanus. Interestingly, Josie Rourke, the director of the play, chose Tom Hiddleston (our beloved Loki) to play Coriolanus’s complex masculine character. The contrast between the modern stage setting and the characters in contemporary Roman costumes left me feeling alienated and confused. In his book Theatre and Politics, Kelleher suggests that entertainment is “to show hospitality to someone, make them your guest, make them in your welcome” (65). This modern adaptation of Coriolanus challenged my presence as an audience. I had to partake in the conflict of historical figures in a contemporary setting and feel the fragility of human nature. The conflict between Coriolanus of 1605 and the present modern time challenged me to re-examine how our evolving social norms influence our fear of political movements. 

Theatre has the power to be the mirror for society. Coriolanus’ tragedy raises questions about the actions of authoritarian government and the reactions of people in difficult times. I learned that theatre can give voice to the voiceless, unveil forgotten truths, and challenge how things have always been said and done. 

Coriolanus showed me that our humanity is vulnerable but worth living. It showed me that I might not get angry and go to a protest or send thousands of tweets about the mixed messages from the political and religious leaders, but I become passionate about stories. The play gave me a reason to fly with the Destination Theatre when there was no airline to take me to the UK. 

Theatre is powerful; it opens conversations about morals and current events that are happening all around the world. The theatre encourages us to move from human cruelty and savagery and instead to come together to have union with compassion. 

Theatre defines healthy social and political change. It explaines what change is, and what it could become. 

Destination Theatre changed my outlook and inspired me by a love that is more powerful than being inspired by fear.

My first visit of London, UK