Ms Allum, also chairwoman of the academic committee of the Association of Heads of Independent Schools of Australia in NSW, said it was a legitimate way of interpreting Shakespeare's themes using a modern-day understanding of feminism, race relations or Marxism. "There's always been different ways of looking at a play and drawing different meanings," she said.
Then why hamstring the young ladies by restricting the interpretations to those three?
"I find the question sublimely stupid," Professor Bloom . . . said yesterday.
And Ms. Allum as well, though much less sublimely stupid.
OK first off I am a SCEGGS student and the exam question within the article was the one that was proposed to me during the Year 11 term 1 exam last year.
At the very beginning of the course i to felt that it was stupid to get us to write a paragraph on how a feminist, Marxist and race reading is supported in the text but as we meaning the class went through the text it became clear on how the teachers were wanting us to respond to the Question.
The fact that the readings were developed more recently than when the plays were written IS NOT what was the mean to be the point of the exercise. The point of analyzing the play using these reading was to BROADEN our own understanding of the text and how different view points can change how the reader responds to the play.
For Example:
A FEMINIST reading may may write a negative response to the play because of the underlying nature of the man being superior to the females in the play, and many other ways that can be disputed.
A RACE reading of the play could be on how the nature of the moor Othello, having to constantly prove himself even after showing himself to be a capable leader while Cassio achieved his position due to family and being a white man.
Many different readings can be used to examine the text. When we were studying Othello there were other readings that were used including Social-Political reading.