Cymbeline

Reading points: some matters to consider as you read:

The play as an "experiment" in a new genre, as "a romance": combining standard elements of tragedy, comedy, and the fantastical (the "romantic," as found in chivalric romances, e.g., tales of fantasy or with major elements of the fantastic).

bullet Psychological realism in characterization, despite the play's being clearly not "realistic" in genre.

bullet Even more so than in all the previous plays, observe the play's movement from chaos or disorder to coherent order at the end.  Note the comparatively extremely complex plotting.

bullet Thematic reliance on providence: mercy and forgiveness as greater concerns than strict justice; themes of spiritual renewal or rebirth.

bullet A great variety of appealing or attractive characters, even the villainous: especially with the villainous, how are is their "evil-ness" mitigated, or how are they redeemed from being wholly tragic characters?

bullet A fusing of a great many standard plot devices from other plays we've read (and from other literary genres more generally). 

bullet With the return to distinct multiple plots, of course be on the lookout for ways the three primary plots reinforce or mirror one another.

bullet At the risk of appearing to blaspheme, consider different ways this play may be flawed in any respect: it has been condemned by some notable critics as "imperfect" throughout the centuries—do you see significant weaknesses anywhere in this play? How so? 

bullet Whether or not it's as an imperfection, observe seeming inconsistencies within specific characters, either in their psychological makeup or in their dramatic function in the play. 

bullet Ponder the play's commentary on women, both in positive and negative terms.

bullet Consider the the deus ex machina climax of the play: does the appearance of Jupiter fit the play awkwardly, or does it fit with appropriate coherence and consistency?

bullet This play hasn't been translated into film except in the distant past (twice in silent movies).  Why might this be?  Why do you think this play has not been produced as a modern film?