Yeah, I was really confused with the two terms at first. I think that I was thinking that representational was a play not meant for an audience. But that sounds kinda silly now, because that is the whole purpose of a play. If you didn't intend to have an audience, why would you even go to the trouble of performing it? After going over it more in class, I think I got more of an idea on what they are.

I was reading an editorial in this morning's paper and the writer, though writing about nothing related to Shakespeare except in the vaguest sense, recalled something said by one of the professors in her major field of study, which seemed to be Spanish literature (or maybe just literature in general, not that it matters). That line was "truest the artist." What does that mean? Well, she took it to mean, and I agree with her, that when an artist puts something in a piece of art, whether a play, painting, poem or whatever, that it is there for a reason. So, we should ask ourselves, what is the reason for Shakespeare putting in slaves who are repeatedly beaten? Are we to laugh at this, and if so, how? Should we be laughing because it causes us discomfort? Because it really is funny? Of course, as the audience, we have to work this out for ourselves, but we also, as stagers of the play, have to work out what we want the audience to get from this. Bradley