If I were to date Scalia, is that outside my social class?

     Ok, so first things first. I don't really think social class is that important in Twelfth Night but it is prevalent nonetheless. However, Scalia made this blog non-negotiable so I'm gonna be pulling so much stuff out of my ass. While the idea of social class is definitely important for the subplot, I don't really think it has much to do with the overall plot of love. So I'm going to try and break this up as well as I can.

     Cesario/Viola. The upper-class disguised as the lower-class. If social class has any deeper meaning I believe that it is centralized around this character. So let's summarize. Olivia (high class) likes Cesario (low class). Orsino (high class) likes Olivia (high class). Viola (high class but disguised as a low class) likes Orsino (high class). So would love between classes work? Yes, I believe it can. There is nothing wrong with Olivia going after Cesario. I don't really think that Shakespeare meant for it to be such a taboo thing for her to do. When the play was written the idea of crossing social classes was something quite frowned upon but in this case, it seems entirely normal. It could be due to Olivia's overall status. She has a lot of power and is not just of a higher class, but is the higher class. So there you go. Love between classes can work. However, is it stable? Would loving someone from a lower class automatically pull you down to match their level, or would they rise to match yours? I think in the case of Twelfth Night it would be the latter. If Lady Olivia truly loved Cesario, she would bring him up to rise with her on the social ladder. I do not believe that if the two were to wed that there would be this huge scandal that the Lady Olivia has married a commoner. A servant, no less. It's something I would have to think more about, but currently, I do not really think it would matter.
     This brings me into my next topic. Can someone of a lower class truly love someone of an upper class? Let me explain. If you saw the opportunity to marry someone with exuberant fame and wealth would you love them for who they are or what they are? Does Malvolio truly love Olivia or does he love what Olivia is? Malvolio may very well be just lusting after the power and glory that the Lady Olivia holds. Marrying into an upper class would ensure a better life and would essentially guarantee the easy road for the rest of his days. On the other hand, Olivia liking Cesario gains her nothing. She has no reason to like Cesario for anything he has or is. He is simply a servant to Count Orsino. Olivia has power and wealth and could, in essence, have anything her heart desires. The only reason to love Cesario is that she loves Cesario.
     This could explain why the joke was played on Malvolio. Maria and the rest of the servants understood his ambitions and sought to knock him down a few pegs. They knew that he liked Olivia because he wanted out of his social class and wanted to move up in the world. Playing this prank on Malvolio would ensure this never to happen. However, I don't think they would have done this simply just to prevent him from achieving his goal. I definitely get the sense that Malvolio thinks he is better than the rest of the servants and the joke is probably played on him because, to put it simply, the guy is a dick.
     So anyway, social class is definitely prevalent in the play and I won't downplay its presence. As I wrote this blog I began to realize that it may be a bit more important than I originally thought but it's still no main theme. If this was on the AICE test I could probably write a bit about it but I hope it's not.

Gender is a social construct

     Ok so here we are. We've watched the movie and listened to the play. But nobody has yet dared to ask: what do I, Vincent Piranio, think of it? Well, to put it simply I thought the ending of the movie was much funnier than the end of the play (considering we never read the ending of the play but when comparing the end of the movie to the beginning of the play I do find the former the funnier of the two). Let's get one thing straight right at the beginning. I love awkward romance. I think it's super cringy but it's also stupid funny when it plays out. Personally, I would try to find a happy balance between the two ways in directing the play. In all honesty, my direction is based off my initial perception of each character in the play.
     I really liked how Olivia's character was portrayed as this romantic type. I don't really believe that her romance should be seen as funny. If anyone should be treated as a romantic it should be her. Her backstory is quite tragic but it is very glossed over even though it is quite important in terms of the plot and why Viola attempts to work for her. Her love should be seen in its truest form. Truly earnest and selfless for Cesario. I don't really think it should be seen as funny as Scalia puts it. He says that it's funny that she falls in love so fast but I would not direct it like that. In my stage direction, Olivia would be sincerely in love but the audience would feel bad for her because we know the one that she loves does not share the same feelings (Viola/Cesario). Olivia's love would continue not to be reciprocated and Orsino. I think the summarize, Olivia's love should be portrayed as tragic as opposed to the humorous love of Orsino.
     Orsino. What a guy. This guy is what the locals call an iron chode. He's hopeless. Loveless. And nobody loves him the same way he loves them. This is where the comedy should be. I think that the play only grazes the comedy of this but the movie hits it spot on. It should be an awkward love. He should be acting like he knows what he's doing but it should be quite obvious to the audience that he does not. The bumbling buffoon of the play, if you will. His love for Olivia is completely idealized. He has no proof that they would be good for each other, and (from what the play has portrayed) has spent no time with her at all. How does he even know he loves her? The loved he has is a joke and should be treated as such.
     Augencheek. AKA Asscheek. Is he gay? Bi? Just a flamboyant heterosexual male? Well, the play and the movie see it as much different. I think his dual personality is downplayed extremely hard in the movie and I think in turn the movie missed out on a lot of the comedy Augencheek provided in the play. During Shakespearean times, this flamboyant/homosexual nature was very comedic but in a different way than it would be today. The sassy gay is in, the flamboyant gay is out. I would try to take his character into a modern twist of homosexual behavior.
     Ok, the finale. How would I direct Cesario/Viola's love? Well, in my opinion, I don't really think it holds too much weight in terms of the overall plot. I think the main part of the plot is how Orsino like Olivia but Olivia likes Cesario. I, personally, do not think that Viola's love for Orsino really matters. However, if I had to portray her love in any way I would try to find it as funny. I believe that her love holds no purpose for any tragic undertone so it should add the comedy of the overall play. Shakespeare knew what he was doing in trying to make his audience laugh. I think the audio of the play got much closer to the original intent than the movie. If I had to pick one way to do it I would follow the audio. However, I think a combination of both in different ways would be ideal.