Exam Thoughts

Dearest Evil Ones,

I'm about to read your essays, which is a highlight of my year. I should post grades on Sunday, or Monday at the latest. My toughest assignment is to judge the good work from the exceptional work, because I know that all you created good essays. Now that your exams are complete, please post your thoughts on the exam process. Vent if you like. Add what you thought after you left the room or wish you had time. Did you "like" the exam? Anything is welcome.

Merry Christmas. Happy 2012. I look forward to being part of your most special of semesters.

CC

Present-day Screwtape Letter

I know I'm blowing up the blog here but I keep finding stuff I think we'd all find a little interesting.  If you've got time read this.  It's pretty funny, a little extremist, but funny if you take it with a grain of salt.

http://web.mac.com/r.bryant/Rebecca_Bryant/A_Sampler_of_Articles,_Essays_&_Short_Stories_files/Screwtape.pdf

Funny/Interesting Quote on Evil

I found this looking online for secondary sources:

" 'Pure' evil requires exclusion.  It is evil undiluted, two hundred proof, served in an old fashioned shot glass and taken neat, without a chaser.  It is all evil and nothing but evil, and its impact is unweakened as it ages." 

I thought that was pretty clever and true.  It goes back to what Coach Crook said about the essence of evil being too potent for us to handle.

Heart of Darkness, presence of evil

In the Heart of Darkness discussion paper, Coach Crook told me to blog on how I believed the jungle represented evil. I said that the jungle is the abstract villain that changes good and pure men into evil sinners upon enterin the jungle. What do y'all think about that. Especially Lani. A little birdie told me you would disagree....

The Problem of Evil

So I've been typing in 'evil' into the google search engine, and several websites refer to the logical problem of evil. This list (from wikipedia) tries to rationalize the presence of evil. What do you think about it?

1. God exists.
2. God is omnipotent, omniscient, and perfectly good.
3. A perfectly good being would want to prevent all evils.
4. An omniscient being knows every way in which evils can come into existence.
5. An omnipotent being, who knows every way in which an evil can come into existence, has the power to prevent that evil from coming into existence.
6. A being who knows every way in which an evil can come into existence, who is able to prevent that evil from coming into existence, and who wants to do so, would prevent the existence of that evil.
7. If there exists an omnipotent, omniscient, and perfectly good being, then no evil exists.
8. Evil exists (logical contradiction).

Reading vs listening

When I listened to Heart of Darkness it was a totally different experience that when I read it. I actually felt like I was listening to Marlow telling the story. I even tried listening to it in the dark...very cool, I was really able to relate to how the men in the story must have felt hearing that story in the dark!

Every time I left the classroom after the movie, I felt like I had awoken from a horrible, horrible nightmare. It's phenomenal that a watching a movie could create such strong feelings. Definitely one of the greatest movies I have seen, but way too depressing to see again! The lighting and the music really impressed upon me how evil the war was. Everything they did in Vietnam, at least in the movie, seemed like pointless bloodshed. Everybody was miserable, and nobody was winning. Was that a point the director was trying to make?

Willard

I wonder what happens to Willard once he returns home... does he succumb to his demons? At the start of the movie, has he just returned from a previous assassination? Maybe he hates his life of brutality, but the only cure he knows of is to murder more people. I think Willard just wears his emotions on his sleeve, but to such an extent that he becomes animalistic instead of human at certain points.

Overall Feelings

After seeing all the horror and bizzare things happening throughout the movie, I was left with a feeling of dissapointment at the end of the movie. I feel like there was all this build-up to when Willard would finally kill Kurtz and they would leave, but once it happened Willard and the surfer dude just walked out of the jungle onto their boat and floated away.... It just seemed insufficient to me after all that had happened to them.... Maybe that's the way its supposed to be? Maybe all the sacrifices they made and all the innocent people killed and all the destruction they witnessed was supposed to seem like a waste because of what it got them in the end? Honestly I thought the entire movie was full of absurdities. They should change the name to Absurdity Now!

The chaos of Vietnam is how I imagine Hell to be, and I definitely saw a correlation to Wizard of Oz:

1. Hurtz was the Wizard, who seemed all mighty and powerful when he was just a voice, but once you actually SEE him, its a bit of a letdown and you realize he's weak and only in power because of his words
2. The natives jumping around in the jungle were like the flying monkeys.
3. Willard should be Dorothy except he doesn't want to go home...so I don't know who he is

Shadows

When Willard finally meets Kurtz in Apocalypse Now, I was really annoyed that you couldn't see his face because of all the shadows. But then I got to thinking about how the Coppola wanted to show that Kurtz is a dark character. Pretty cool...

The Dog

This might be terrible, but I felt worse for that cute puppy than for all those Vietnamese people that died in Kilgore's attack. Isn't that ironic and horrible? That I felt more empathy for a dog than for hundreds of people. Am I alone here?
That was a really cute puppy. I looked on the internet, but I couldn't find any backstory about the puppy or even his owner. Too bad.

Weird Music?

All the music in Apocalypse Now is so eerie! And, I think it's very fitting because we know that in all the mess of the Vietnam War, something else is happening. Can evil take shape in music?

The Nature of Evil

Both of the villains we have studied so far have something interesting in common. When Iago's machinations are finally uncovered, we takes a vow of silence and basically disappears form the play. Similarly, when Satan completes his evil mission, he slinks into the bushes and vanishes. What does this say about the nature of evil? Does evil only exist so long as it has a purpose and then fades away?

Confusion

Throughout the poem Satan talks about Hell as a terrible, awful, bad place compared to Heaven. He keeps talking about "how far we've fallen" and how its such a shame that they're not in Heaven anymore. I don't understand how Satan can be happy with what he has done if he keeps complaining about his situation. I figured that because Satan is so evil that he would consider what we consider bad to be good. But strangely my opinion of Hell seems to be his opinion: bad.

Satan and his demons are aware that what they are doing is evil, they even call it evil. I would have thought that evil would become good and good would become evil.

I think Coach Crook, you said something about Hell not being the opposite of Heaven but an inverse of it? Is this what that means? Or is this just Satan knowing what is evil and liking it? Or if not liking it, at least tolerating it.

Satan's Power

Satan's last speech is to Eve, trying to convince her to eat the apple. His first speech was to Beelzebub trying to convince him to never return to God in Heaven. I think this just shows that the only real power that Satan has is his power of deceit and temptation which are both very powerful and very effective. While God has many more powers than Satan has, he doesn't appear to have, or just wouldn't ever use, the power of deceit.

Hell forever

As stated by the Dr. Faustus quotes and some of Paradise Lost, Hell exists everywhere that Heaven is not, and Hell is felt by all those that have been in Heaven once they are all out of Heaven. Does this apply to people who have never been in Heaven before? If so, how do they know what Heaven feels like to have a perspective of what Hell should feel like?

Battle in Heaven

A few days ago, Coach Crook summarized the "fight" in heaven, and how it wasn't technically a battle...so then how do we know that Mammon and Michael are such great warriors if they didn't technically fight?

Revelations

Okay, so I just realized this: the title "Paradise Lost" has a double meaning. It can refer to Satan being thrown out of heaven, and humans being thrown out of Eden. God kicks them out of both, so I guess he is kinda like the great evictor in the sky...

Thoughts

Ok so I was thinking about Satan and his ego issues. Today we talked about why Satan let Beelzebub say the idea and stuff, but I also started thinking about why he had the round table discussion type thing. I don't believe he ever had the intention of using any of the other angels' ideas. He used the appearance of a democracy to make himself seem like the fair leader. He likes to let people talk just so that he can say his idea was better. He did the same thing when Beelzebub asked for volunteers to do the scouting mission. Satan volunteered after a long silence and so he seemed like the best leader. Evil characters are also so manipulative. They know how to lie and cheat and make themselves feel like the coolest kids on the planet.

Also, I was thinking about the Mammon guy. He says he is the strongest and the best angel, so why is he serving Satan? In class, we said that it is because Satan started the rebellion and he needed that leadership, but if he wanted to rise up so badly and he is the strongest, why didn't he start the rebellion?

Is it possible to be both good and evil?

Crazy Capitalization

Has anyone else realized that Milton capitalizes practically every third word in the book? I understand capitalizing some words for emphasis, but I think he does so often that the impact tends to wear off. Why does Milton insist on going overboard with capitalization?

The Son of God

In the beginning, there was only God, who created all life, correct? If so, everything that God created would be, in essence, his (sorry, his/her/its) child. If this is true, how can "The Son of God" be more of God than Satan. They were both born from God, so they should both be God's sons, and there for equal, but clearly, it is not so. Does anyone have a solution to this conundrum?

Free Will

I talked to Coach Crook about a question that arose in class one day. Why doesn't God just kill off Satan if he knew that Satan was going to rebel against him? Since we have free will, we have the ability to choose between God and Satan. We are his children, and he wants us to have a good life. But, he can't force his love upon his children. Everyone has a choice. If one turns towards God, then that exemplifies God's glory, good triumphing over evil.

2nd in Command

I know this is a little late and not what we're reading right now.

Before Satan fell, he was the "right-hand man" to God. But once God created the Son of God, Jesus, the Messiah, ect, he was demoted to his "left-hand man." Once in Hell, Satan told Beezlebub that he was 2nd in command. Wouldn't you think that Satan would realize what a risk you run when naming someone your "right-hand man" or 2nd in command? He is his own case in point: when Satan was God's 2nd in command he began to feel that he was better than God and that his true deserved position was head honcho. Couldn't this same jealousy and resentment grow in Beezlebub? What is it with these powerful, smart people creating problems for themselves??

Vito is God

If Vito from The Godfather was literally God; that would make Micheal, Satan. Think about it. I assume "Vito" means life, like in vitality or Spanish "viva", and Micheal was the favorite son. Although both Micheal and Satan begin their live following their fathers' wishes, they soon revolt and all things of goodness are taken out of their lives. In Satan's case, he is banished from heaven to hell, and in Micheal's case, he looses his family and is forced into solitude. Although I can't know this for sure, even though Micheal makes a lot of decisions that Vito wouldn't have approved of, I still feel that Vito loves him in the same way that God still loves Satan after his rebellion.

Democracy?

Today in class Coach Crook mentioned that the devil will create a fake democracy in hell. We also touched on the topic of how God gives everyone the choice to be good or to be evil. If God promotes free choice than why did he punish Satan for choosing to overthrow him? Is God really any more noble than Satan?

Hope in Hell

In Paradise Lost, John Milton describes hell as a place where "hope never comes," but later Satan says "we may with more successful hope resolve/ To wage by force or guile eternal Warr..." (66, 120-121). That seems contradictory to me. Does Milton mean to specify that "good" hope does not exist in hell? Then again, hell is supposed to be absolute torment, but it seems that the fallen angels take some sort of comfort in the fact that they will not repent but continue to rebel.

Jewish View on the Devil

So after our discussion in class today I started to wonder what the Jews believe about the devil. So after looking around chabad.org i came across some interesting points in this article: http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/1093498/jewish/Can-You-Sell-Your-Soul-to-the-Devil.htm

"we see that G‑d created an angel to play the role of provocateur; that he is a messenger of, and subservient to, G‑d. He was not a fallen angel or sent to Hell, where he began fighting G‑d; he was created to be Satan. Neither does Satan spend his days stoking the flames of hell with his pitchfork. He is a presence on earth with a mission: to provoke people to disobey G‑d's will."

"There is no power of evil independent of G‑d; otherwise this would imply a lack of G‑d's all-inclusive control and power. To quote the Book of Isaiah:

"…from the place where the sun rises until the place where it sets, there is nothing but Me. I am G‑d, there is nothing else. [I am He] Who forms light and creates darkness, Who makes peace and creates evil; I am G‑d Who makes all these."3

Obviously then, the satan is not an autonomous force who opposes G‑d and recruits people to his militia. Rather, the satan is a spiritual entity that is completely faithful to its maker"

We were discussing today in class that everything God creates is good. However, God was the creator of hell and of Satan. I think some of the points I pulled from the article help answer our questions.

"Brave" Satan

In class today we talked about why Satan rebelled against God. And, we touched on the word brave. I believe that when someone is brave, or has courage, he takes a stand against a being who has been doing something wrathful. From that, I think of Robin Hood. And, I don't think this applies to Satan because God was never acting badly. God is the essence of good, so Satan wasn't brave.

Anthony

In the scene when Kay tells Michael about the abortion, they mention that something is wrong with their other son Anthony...What is it? Could it be that he is very quiet just like Vito as a child?

Movie

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2PaliLAQT8k

This movie says Shakespeare 'never wrote a single word,' and that his entire career was basically a farce!

Godfather Part 2 Ending

Did anyone notice Michael's face when the camera zoomed in? Half of his face was covered by shadow...does that mean something about his character? I feel like he's always in his "family business" mode. We all know that everyone compares him to his father, but times have changed. And although Michael tries his best to provide for his family, he never spends time with either of his kids. Perhaps he thought he had time to fix everything with his family, but the damage is already done.

Father and Son

Pauline Kael's review of Godfather part two definitely made me appreciate Coppola's directing style. I agree with the audience's desire to see more of Don Vito during the early 1900's because it helped me see a better parallel between Michael's method of handling the family business and his father's foundation for the family. People react differently to Michael's power and his father's. Kael described Don Vito as a Robin Hood character when the Italian community seeks his protection and friendship. Michael, on the other hand, looks like a Robin Hood gone bad from my view. He rarely is seen doing any "good deeds" for others and expresses an appetite for more power than his father left him with. Although Michael might detest being compared to his father, it's hard not to see the shift from a family oriented business to the stress on money and power Michael brought with him.

The "new" Godfather

The members of the Corleone family and Family, I noticed, are always bringing up Vito.  This has got to bother Michael.  It seems like they are always comparing him to his father.  Even in the trail Vito was brought up.... Also, is "Godfather" not the name given to every new leader in The Family?  I thought that Michael is now the Godfather, but no one calls him that.  Does he have to earn it?

Othello and the Godfather

In an earlier post, I compared Barzini from the first Godfather to Iago and Micheal to Othello. I think it is an apt metaphor because Barzini is the one who initiates Micheal's decent to violence by shooting Don Vito. So if the movie continues to somewhat reflect the play, Micheal will have to cause, either directly or indirectly, Kate's death because Kate mirrors Desdemona. I'm calling it- Kate is going to die and it will be Micheal's fault somehow.

New Category

Please note that I have added a new category for your comments relating to The Godfather.

Othello as a Tragic "Hero"

For the play to be a tragedy, Othello must be a tragic hero.Yet, looking back over the play, I don't know if he deserve such a title. In my mind, a hero must gain the sympathy of the reader and fight evil. Othello does neither. The only two views I see of Othello are the overly confident general from the first act and the crazy paranoid husband from the end. Also, he never seems to be heroic. He never makes any attempt to fight Iago on anything. Can such a jealous, manipulable man be called a tragic "hero"?

Iago's name

Iago is another name for Jacob, meaning “heal grabber;”  in the Bible, Jacob is Esau’s sly twin who tricks Esau out of his inheritance and then dresses as Esau to recieve his father's blessing.

Just an interesting tid-bit I found.  Iago is very sly and cunning and uses trickery to get his way.  I bet Shakespeare did that on purpose!

Iago

Iago is really really really truly evil.  In the last scene he could have denied the accusations, but he all but fessed up to it.  I think that Iago knew all along that he wouldn't "get away with it."  But I also think that he wanted everyone to know that he fooled them all.  Iago is so sadistic that he recieves more gratification in seeing, for example, Othello's anguish at knowing that he unjustly killed Desdemona, than he would have if he had gotten away with it (and survived).  Iago seems to just live for the despair of others, and once he reached what in his opinion might have been the most despair he could have possibly caused in one day (and one room!), he saw no more purpose in living or talking.  Iago was motivated to do evil for the sake of simply doing evil, and he was motivated to live by evil alone; so once Iago had achieved that height of evil which he wanted to, he saw no purpose to live.

The Moors in Spain

Today in Spanish, my teacher showed us a documentary on the history of Islam in Spain.  The narrator explained that when the Catholic Monarchs first came to rule, they tried to destroy all evidence of Muslims in Spain; these Muslims were called the Moors.  I know we talked a little bit about this in class, but the Moors were descendents from northern Africa who conquered and ruled the Iberian Peninsula, which they called Al Andalus, for nearly 800 years.  Al Andalus was made up of what are now Spain and Portugal.  The documentary went on to say that propaganda sparked by the Crusades depicted the Moors as dark-skinned, savage, blood-thirsty enemies, which was not true.  The rest of the video was about the cities and Islamic castle that the Moors built.  I really like it when my classes overlap, and I thought it was interesting learning more about Othello’s background.

The Moors in Spain

Today in Spanish, my teacher showed us a documentary on the history of Islam in Spain.  The narrator explained that when the Catholic Monarchs first came to rule, they tried to destroy all evidence of Muslims in Spain; these Muslims were called the Moors.  I know we talked a little bit about this in class, but the Moors were descendents from northern Africa who conquered and ruled the Iberian Peninsula, which they called Al Andalus, for nearly 800 years.  Al Andalus was made up of what are now Spain and Portugal.  The documentary went on to say that propaganda sparked by the Crusades depicted the Moors as dark-skinned, savage, blood-thirsty enemies, which was not true.  The rest of the video was about the cities and Islamic castle that the Moors built.  I really like it when my classes overlap, and I thought it was interesting learning more about Othello’s background.

Interesting Article

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/18/nyregion/othello-at-the-shakespeare-theater-at-drew-university-review.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=Iago&st=cse

I find it interesting how this reviewer basically has the same opinions of the play as we do. It's great to see our class being as introspective as a professional! Referring back to what Molly was saying, it seems inaccurate for the play to be named "Othello" as most of our attention and energy is spent on Iago. This article seems to agree with Molly, Iago clearly dominates the stage.

Interesting Iago Article

How Iago Explains the World

The link above is to a really interesting article from the New York Times that talks about how the problems that the characters face in the play are similar to the problems America is facing today.

 

 

Emilia vs Iago

In class today we talked about how Emilia really had no intention of giving Iago Desdemona's hankerchief (at least the real one).  There is no way that she could have thought he was going to do anything good with the hankerchief.  I think Emilia just wants to see the good in everyone.  She believes that Desdemona did not cheat on Othello.  She does not realize that her own husband is incredibly evil.  She, unlike Iago, wants everyone to be good and nice, while Iago goes out of his way to see everyone in a negative light.  Emilia is almost the complete opposite of Iago.

Othello's Insecurity

We talked in class about how such a rational and noble character such as Othello could be driven to such horrible extremes under the influence of Iago. It seems to me that Othello is largely responsible for destroying his own happiness (of course with the baiting of Iago). Though he says at the beginning that he completely trusts Desdemona, I think in the back of his mind, he was expecting something bad to happen. Othello told Desdemona stories of how painful his life had been before he met her. Perhaps he's just used to pain and suffering so when happiness comes along, he cannot fully believe in it or he doesn't think he trully deserves it. He expects this bliss to be temporary and in doing so, he creates an issue that could've easily been resolved with help from Iago.

Ending

I loved Emilia's part in the ending, but I was kind of disapointed in Iago's role. You'd think that if he took all the time in his cruel planning that he would have a final quote that would enlighten readers of his motives or his true thoughts...His last words were "Demand me nothing. What you know, you know. From this time forth I never will speak word." I feel that it's anticlimactic. Everyone knows he's guilty so why not say something like "I don't regret what I did" or at least an evil laugh? Something along those lines...

title

I just have a vague comment/question on the title of the play....  Its called Othello, but we get the most insight into Iago's mind and his actions.  Maybe it's just because we're taking a class called EVIL and not good?  Just a little curious.  Personally, I think a more suitable title would have been "Iago" if Shakespeare wanted to stick with names here.

Age Difference

I've been thinking about the age difference between Othello and Desdemona. I realize that women usually married young and men sort of old, but definitely not as old as Othello back then. Since he's been in relationships before, shouldn't he know how women are like? I feel like he holds her way too accountable for her actions, but she's only 19!  Shouldn't Othello be more loving and caring towards Desdemona? I just don't feel any sympathy towards him.

Emilia

In class we have been debating whether Emilia is forced to be an accomplice of Iago. I think that in Act 5 scene 2 we learn that we were not giving Emilia enough credit. She personally ruins everything Iago had created by telling Othello the truth about the handkerchief. I never would have thought that Emilia would have been the one to blow Iago's cover. Maybe Desdemona's influence played a bigger role on Emilia than we originally thought. I wonder what motivated Emilia to tell the truth?

Emilia's suspicions

In act 4, Scene 2, Emilia tells Desdemona that "I will be hanged if some eternal villain...to get some office,/Have not devised this slander." Does she realize Iago's plan, since she says that someone devised this plan to get some office (position). If so, is she giving Desdemona a big clue here by saying it? Or does Emilia not realize that Iago is creating this exact plan she is thinking of?

Emilia

Emilia states

I will be hanged, if some eternal villain,

Some busy and insinuating rogue,

Some cogging, cozening slave, to get some office,

Have not devised this slander. I will be hanged else!

It almost seems as if she knows it is her husband... or else this statement is just extremely ironic. At this point, how could she not have any inkling of Iago's intentions? Could this be some subliminal message to Desdemona...or is Emilia blindly raging this? Is this her way of attacking her husband without actually attacking him?

Iago's Ultimate Plan

What is Iago's ultimate plan? I know he's an agent of chaos and wants to ruin Othello's happiness, but does he ultimately want to end Othello's life? Does he want Othello's position? Or does he have no real plan at all and just wants to be a sadist?

Epilepsy & Othello

Wow. In Act 4 scene 1, Othello falls into an epilepsy. It's actually really funny! Because this man is so stressed out by Desdemona's so-called infidelity, he keels over and has  a seizure. I guess you could say he's literally love-sick. Why does he have these seizures? And is it bad to think of it humorously?

Iago

I just love how Iago says "Men should be what they seem, Or those that be not, would they might seem none!" basically saying that if a person (he is referencing Cassio) is not honest, that person should at least not even pretend to look honest. Where does this leave Iago? Is he self-aware? Does he see his comment as self deprecating?

"manly" Iago

In my version of the play I have a footnote for "guinea hen," the name Iago calls Desdemona or just women in general.  In my book it says the word can also be interpreted as slang for prostitute.  This got me thinking again how Iago is always looking for a window to slide in a dirty joke or "hanky pankage" and that maybe what he says in the next line, he would "rather change [his] humanity with a baboon," the baboon is Othello.  Perhaps Iago's apparent manliness is a guise for his sexual preference?  In other words, Iago is gay. I'm not sure if I'm pulling this from back field or if it's maybe plausible.  This would explain, however, his anger at Othello for marrying Desdemona (which is, for the reader at least, when he starts plotting against Othello).

There has been speculation into whether Shakespeare was gay, so this just popped into my head.... Tell me if I'm crazy

Cassio...Again

In Act 2 scene 3, I don't understand why Cassio doesn't man up and ask Othello directly for forgiveness. Is it because he's too ashamed of stabbing Montano?  Why does he listen to Iago's advice? After all, doesn't Cassio believe he's better than Iago?

Iago..

As I was reading scene iii I was at first confused by Iago's intentions. At first it just seemed like he was targeting Cassio which I found odd because of his hatred toward Othello. Then, he spoke of slandering Desdemona's reputation. I was confused about how all of this hurt Othello, his original goal, but then it all came together. He was able to make Cassio and Desdemona both look bad, while also beginning to ruin Othello's relationship. He also made himself look generous because Othello thought he cared so much about Cassio. Iago clearly showed how clever he was in this scene.

Othello and The Godfather

While I was trying to establish a connection between both the play and the movie, I discovered some interesting character correlations. I believe that Iago is like Barzini because they both control the action from the background without becoming too involved. Also, because the play is a tragedy, I assume Iago dies in the end like Barzini did. I have yet to discover if Othello himself is Don Vito or Don Micheal. Thoughts?

Cassio Question

This is a random question and I'm probably thinking too hard about this but why does Cassio call Desdemona "divine" and "exquisite"? Is it out of respect? Or is there something more? And, why does he mention this to Iago? I found the quotes in Act 2 Scene 1 and Scene 2.

Food for Thought

At the very beggining of Act  2 scence 3 Cassio questions Iago's trustworthyness. Othello has given Iago a job but Cassio does not have faith in Iago to fufill them. Instead, Cassio feels the need to do it personally. Of course, Othello loyal declairs Iago an honest man. However, I find that up till this point no one has seriously questioned Iago's legitamcy. I wonder why Cassio is the first one to question it? Does Cassio know more than we think he does?

Othello Act 2

At the end of scene 1 of Act 2, Iago talks about how Cassio is in love with Desdemona. Then he says "Now, I do love her too." Is he talking about his wife or Desdemona? If he is talking about Desdemona, does he actually love her or does he love that he helps his evil plan?

Othello confusion..

I don't know if this is one of those things where we find out later or if it remains ambiguous, but it seems like the only person Iago has a reason to hate is Cassio.  Why does he hate Othello so much?  It cannot just be a racist hatred, Iago seems too obsessive about his plans to destroy Othello for it to be founded solely on racism.

Why does Desdemona love Othello?

Othello

OK, Evil Ones, now that you're reading Shakespeare's great tragedy on you own, feel free to post comments, questions, reactions to our Evil Blog.  Be sure to Post them under the "Category" of Othello, and "tag" them as you think is helpful.

draft

brilliant

zdfhsdfklhsfl;sdhf

Prompt concerning The Godfather

So, who is the villain in this famous movie?  What is the manifestation of evil?