So, I've been falling a little behind with this blogging bit. Ah well.
I found the dichotomy between nature and fortune in As You Like It particularly fascinating. It seems Shakespeare is confronting the classic pastoral myth. He creates a distinction between the gifts of fortune and the gifts of nature, much as there is a boundary between the urban court and the forest of Arden. Celia and Rosalind's conversation in act II on how these gifts are misplaced show the issue with attributing such mythic qualities to the pastoral scene. Nature can give great gifts, as it has to both Rosalind and Celia, but without the gift of fortune, without the urban, these gifts are often left by the wayside, unused or unwanted.
It also seems that Shakespeare again confronts the artifice of the play in As You Like It. This time, the bard through Jaques brings this questioning of reality to the metaphysical level. If "All the worlds a stage, and all the men and women merely players," of what consequence is free will? What, if any, is humanity's place in the greater scheme? In ACT IV we see yet another play within a play, Rosalinde's charade as Ganymede with Orlando. We perceive the artifice, we contemplate how the play acts as a mirror for real experience, yet Shakespeare attempts to apply this to the greater play, to life. As in A Midsummer Nights Dream, The lower rungs of the mythical ladder are reflections of those above. "The best in these are but shadows." Shakespeare questions whether we are but a shadow, and if so, what are we shadows of? Like Plato's cave, are our daily lives only a shadow of some higher, purer truth. If so, what is the purpose of life, and what is the purpose of the play?
