The Second Shepherds' Play is the first work we've seen containing both a plot and a comic subplot. The story of the shepherds, Mak and Gill are a comic parallel to an important event in Christianity. Discuss the parallels between the plot and sub-plot. (To get you started, both plots contain a mother figure.)
This play was quite confusing at first but after reading it over again I see that the play completely takes a turn at the end and starts the story back off referring to the sheep killing to a biblical story of the beginning of christianity, the birth of Christ. The first play has many references to god and scriptures throughout. Mak pretends to be an important person with the cloak over his clothes and comes to speak to the shepherds in hope for return in food for his wife and himself.
ReplyDeleteThe parallelism of the story seems to start showing when Gill comes into the story and they come with the idea to hide the sheep and act as if Gill has had a child. Mak representing the devil with all his lies is worried of being caught now, and decides to go back and sleep with them. Gill saw the
stupidity of this first and said.
"It were a foul blot
To be hanged for the case,"(453-54)
Later in the story the shepherds come to investigate the thievery of their sheep and Gill and Mak have them to believe that the baby is there and they do not want to show it because he is asleep and what not.
After they talk the shepherds into believing this true.
They casually walk away and think to each other that they didn't give presents or anything to show their gratitude for the child.
The parallelism shows a lot now in the story on lines 825 they come back to the house and want to give their sympathy to the wife and the child.
finding their sheep and angrily do not punish Mak but by putting him in a blanket and leaving him knowing that if he trespasses again he will be beheaded for being a thief.
This kind of shows a comic side of the parallelism, How do these shepherds know this is gods child, they give gifts and everything just because they see a kid that is said to be a son of the king(GOD). How is this right if they would go and check and make sure of everything just like in the first story. They gave mary all their trust and everything just as easy as before at Maks house. Correct me if Im wrong on the parallelism of this play but I believe this is it.
I agree with Lago21 in that the play was very confusing at times.I do feel that the story of Mak and Gill and their "lamb" invites comparision with the Nativity story and offers several parallels.
ReplyDeleteThe writer of the play uses the sheep to directly compare it to Jesus, often referred to as a Lamb. Mak and his wife represent Joseph and the Virgin Mary, and the deception involving these events is a symbol of the dishonesty involved in Jesus’ death, acting as a ancestor of what is soon to come. The author uses these biblical ties to also create a story to represent the sides of good and evil and how both are always present. The shepherds represent the side of the good. They have an honest job, work hard for their money, yet get little pay for what they do. These three men are not fully appreciated and are just seen as peasants and nothing more. Society does not think that they are contributing to their society in any way, shape, or form. Mak symbolizes evil, for he lies and tricks others to get what he wants. He is spiteful to others and himself.
The play suggests thoughts of reflecting on the life of Jesus Christ. It seemed that throughout his life, good and evil took turns trying to be the most prevalent. The author shows that it seems that you can’t have one without the other. If good is present, evil will almost definitely show it’s smiling face. When the three shepherds are able to be present at Jesus’ birth, the author is showing that good always overcomes evil. Even though they have been ployed and used, not only did they get their sheep back, but they get the respect from anyone that has heard or seen the story of Jesus Christ.
The play is actually two separate stories presented sequentially; the first is a non-biblical story about a thief, Mak, who steals a sheep from three shepherds. He and his wife, Gill, attempt to deceive the shepherds by pretending the sheep is their son. The shepherds are fooled at first. However, they later discover Mak's deception and toss him on a blanket as a punishment."And I am true as steel,All men wate.But a sickness I feel that holds me full hate(Line 326-329)This line shows how Mak is full of hate,and therefore portrays evil.
At this point, the storyline switches to the familiar one of the three shepherds being told of the birth of Christ by an angel,and being told to go to Bethlehem, where they offer gifts to the Christ child.Again, I agree with Lago21 when they say "The parallelism of the story seems to start showing when Gill comes into the story and they come with the idea to hide the sheep and act as if Gill has had a child. Mak representing the devil with all his lies is worried of being caught now, and decides to go back and sleep with them."However, I am not sure if Mak is supposed to actually represent the devil or if he is just supposed to be more generalized as "evil."