At first I liked Hamlet and I felt bad for him. Now things have changed. In Act III, he is extremely rude to Ophelia and his mother! Like shame shame, Hamlet!! Didn't you listen to your father when he said to let her be and that heaven would deal with her?! Yes they have betrayed him but that certainly does not mean they deserve to be bashed in front of everyone! I also didn't think he was going mad, but now I'm starting to change my mind. I mean wouldn't you go a little bit crazy after your mother started sleeping with your uncle and the woman you once loved lied to you? I would probably be more than a little mad. During the play Hamlet has written, he asks his mother is she likes it or not and she responds, "The lady doth protest too much, methinks" (line 221). Gertrude knows that Hamlet is criticizing her and is trying to make herself look and feel better about how she loved the King and how she loves Claudius now. But then in the very last act, I went back to feeling bad for Hamlet. I mean, his dad was murdered, the woman he loves kills herself, his mom marries his uncle, his uncle accidentally poisons his mom, and Fortinbras shows up to either take the kingdom or he's just passing through. Pretty stinky last couple of months of living. One part that really really stuck out to me is when Claudius lets Gertrude drink out of the poisoned chalice. If he really truly loved her, wouldn't he make her stop? Couldn't he command her to stop? I guess there isn't much really to do because he would've given himself away but he could have offered her a different chalice or asked her to wait until the match was over. But before all of this, Hamlet gets slashed with Laertes's sword, so we all know he's going to die because the sword has been poisoned. Why does Claudius want Hamlet dead so bad? Why does he have to let Gertrude drink from the chalice? I mean, c'mon. There's no way you will live after killing your nephew and wife. Someone is bound to find out which only sets up the domino effect of everything else.
Overall, I really enjoyed this play. Much more than I thought I would. The hardest part for me was figuring out what everyone meant because it's so weird hearing how differently we speak. I did have fun finding the little things Shakespeare did like the double meanings. It was kind of like a puzzle so he give us a bunch of ways to read it and we have to chose which way we want to see things. In the end I feel bad for everyone but Claudius because he really started everything. Hamlet loses most everyone he loves, Ophelia is drawn into madness with her father's death and Hamlet having said he never loved her, Gertrude being betrayed by the man she thought loved her, it's just a sad play. But a really good one at the same time. Now I want to go see it live!!
Friday, February 28, 2014
Hamlet: The Moral Judge
Throughout the play, Hamlet is constantly judging someone for what they have done whether it be Gertrude sleeping with his uncle or his uncle murdering his father. He is infuriated with Gertrude and basically sets her equal to a whore. He says, "She married. O, most wicked speed, to post With such dexterity to incestuous sheets!" (line 156) And of course he has to take revenge on his uncle by killing him. I mean how else would you react to your mom forgetting about your father in a matter of weeks and moving on and pretending like everything is just fine and dandy and sleeping with her husband's brother which is basically a crime but it doesn't really matter because she's the queen. Yes I know, big ramble. But a great point was brought up by a classmate--"He judges everyone else on their actions and decisions. Yet he murders Polonius and is planning on murdering Claudius. Is he one to judge?" After he murders Polonius, he really has no right to judge. When he murders him, he believes it's Claudius. It's really one big accident that happens because Hamlet doesn't stop and think like he always does and just acts abruptly. When it comes to Ophelia, he says, "get thee to a nunnery" (line 121) but he can mean two things. He either means get yourself some help because you're an awful person, or he means get yourself there so we can have some help. They both work, but looking at this morally, he's telling her she needs to be forgiven for all the wrongs she has done. Some classmates brought up the fact that he plays God a few times. He thinks he is too! He says, "Then I must be their scourge and minister" (line 196). One in the way of sending Ophelia to get help, and two punishing Claudius for killing another man who happens to be his father. Hamlet thinks to himself, "when he is drunk asleep, or in his rage...then trip him, that his heels may kick at heaven, and that his soul may be damned and black as hell" (lines 89-95). Hamlet is pretty much saying, "Stop. You shall not pass go. Do not collecteth two hundred dollars. Get thee straight to Hell!" I tried to make that Shakespeareanish but I'm totally not even close to what he would say. He wants to catch him at a bad time when his head is swarming with bad thought so he goes straight to hell. But then what happens to Hamlet if he is killed with all of these thoughts swarming his head before Claudius? Will he go to Heaven because he was trying to save Ophelia, save his mother, and avenge his father's death? ORRR will he go to hell because he's calling Ophelia and his mom whores and plotting to kill Claudius?? The fight can go both ways thanks to Shakespeare's genius double-meaninging (if that even is a word) of every single word.
Credit goes to everyone who helped on the "Moral Judge" poster.
Credit goes to everyone who helped on the "Moral Judge" poster.
Wednesday, February 19, 2014
What does it mean to be invisible?
Invisibility-- not being seen; not able to be seen. or are we just not looking hard enough? :-D
Invisible Man by Ralph Ellison is an interesting book. It's actually a pretty hard read so far. But it's getting better. To me, it's one of those books that you give to a friend and say read until the 8th chapter and if you still do not like it then put it down. The word invisible is a pretty interesting one. And the fact that the narrator has NO NAME makes it even better because it shows how he is just a nobody. He has no label.
In the last couple of chapters I have read, the main character is having trouble figuring out what is right and what is wrong. Well at least he is right now. Who knows what's down the road. At the moment, he is on the way to find a new job after getting expelled. When one of the trustees comes down from the north, the narrator takes him on a tour of the school's property. When they get back, Dr. Bledsoe is furious that the narrator showed the trustee the bad parts around the school. He claims there were "enough decent homes and drives" to show the trustee (138) and that he shouldn't have shown him the "slum" (138). He wants to lie to the trustee about what is around the school. The narrator does not. The words of his grandfather that he claims have stuck with him all this time go with what he's been doing-- "overcome 'em with yeses, undermine 'em with grins, agree 'em to death and destruction, let'em swoller you till they vomit" (16). His grandfather is basically telling him to kill them (the white people) until they "vomit" all of the kindness back up. The narrator is struggling-- he wants to follow his grandfather, wants to do what the trustee wants, but upsets Dr. Bledsoe in the process. He cannot make anyone happy!
The part that really stuck out to me recently is when Dr. Bledsoe says to him, "You don't exist--can't you see that?" (143). Three words: exist. see. invisibility. You cannot see something that does not exist. He cannot SEE that. He didn't say "you're missing the point" he said "can't you see that." What a coinkydink.The way Ellison uses the words exist and see here amazed me. I don't know if I'm explaining it well but it makes sense in my head. It reminds me of Hamlet and how he uses words to mean two or more different things at once. Then again, everything is Hamlet, right?
Invisible Man by Ralph Ellison is an interesting book. It's actually a pretty hard read so far. But it's getting better. To me, it's one of those books that you give to a friend and say read until the 8th chapter and if you still do not like it then put it down. The word invisible is a pretty interesting one. And the fact that the narrator has NO NAME makes it even better because it shows how he is just a nobody. He has no label.
In the last couple of chapters I have read, the main character is having trouble figuring out what is right and what is wrong. Well at least he is right now. Who knows what's down the road. At the moment, he is on the way to find a new job after getting expelled. When one of the trustees comes down from the north, the narrator takes him on a tour of the school's property. When they get back, Dr. Bledsoe is furious that the narrator showed the trustee the bad parts around the school. He claims there were "enough decent homes and drives" to show the trustee (138) and that he shouldn't have shown him the "slum" (138). He wants to lie to the trustee about what is around the school. The narrator does not. The words of his grandfather that he claims have stuck with him all this time go with what he's been doing-- "overcome 'em with yeses, undermine 'em with grins, agree 'em to death and destruction, let'em swoller you till they vomit" (16). His grandfather is basically telling him to kill them (the white people) until they "vomit" all of the kindness back up. The narrator is struggling-- he wants to follow his grandfather, wants to do what the trustee wants, but upsets Dr. Bledsoe in the process. He cannot make anyone happy!
The part that really stuck out to me recently is when Dr. Bledsoe says to him, "You don't exist--can't you see that?" (143). Three words: exist. see. invisibility. You cannot see something that does not exist. He cannot SEE that. He didn't say "you're missing the point" he said "can't you see that." What a coinkydink.The way Ellison uses the words exist and see here amazed me. I don't know if I'm explaining it well but it makes sense in my head. It reminds me of Hamlet and how he uses words to mean two or more different things at once. Then again, everything is Hamlet, right?
Sunday, February 9, 2014
"Facing It"
Recently in class we have been preparing for our big exam by doing multiple choice corrections. I am terrible at them. I have no idea why. Last year I typically did well when we practiced but for some reason this year I have gotten a lot worse. If you think about it, it should really be the opposite. I should be improving. Buuut no. Then again I guess it makes sense. But I guess I just have to face it. (Buddumpchhhh get it?)
The most recent practice we did is a poem about the Vietnam Veterams Memorial which is in Washington, D.C called "Facing It" by Yusef Komunyakaa. It's pretty sad but it's also a great way of explaining how the wall affects veterans and families. At first the speaker explains how he gets lost "inside" (2) the walls. When he's lost, he finds himself trying not to cry. The wall reminds him of the hardships he endured at war. Before he came, he knew that seeing the wall and fading inside of it would bring back strong emotions. The speaker never directly says that which shows that he had tried to prepare especially when he says, "I said I wouldn't" (3). The fact that he compares himself to a "bird of prey" (7) parallels to what he was in the war. When he was a solider, he probably felt like bird always looking for either a dead, dying, or alive victim to devour. The small creatures fear the birds that eat them. But at the same time, everyone out there was a bird of prey which cannot exactly provide the best comfort. The speaker talks like when he is looking at the wall, the wall is holding him ever so tightly in his grasp but when he turns away, it lets him go. The speaker can potentially be saying that when he's there at the wall, his mind is infected with all these swarming memories but as soon as he's ready to turn away, they leave. He might be commenting on how we aren't affected by all the details of a memory every day but how we are when we focus and return to a certain state of mind. As the speaker reads over the "58,022" (14) engraved names, he seems to be looking for his own. He even is "expecting" (15) to see it as if he's still amazed at how he is still alive. I mean, considering how many people were killed during this war and being a survivor and going back to "visit" everyone has to make you think that you're still with them. But is he wishing he had died with them? Thinking about everything those soldiers had to come back to after putting themselves out there and seeing things that we don't even want to ever think about makes me wonder if the speaker had wished he had died there versus coming back. As he touches the name of a fellow soldier, the moment rushes back to him when he was with that soldier. The fact that the veteran is strong enough to even go back and be okay after a tsunami of feelings and memories already shows a lot about his character. The idea of "Facing It", it being the war, being the emotions, being the memories, has to be one of the hardest things the speaker has to do after the war. The wall captures him and his mind. In a split second, it springs back all of the feelings the speaker had. "Facing It" is one of the hardest things the speaker has to do.
The most recent practice we did is a poem about the Vietnam Veterams Memorial which is in Washington, D.C called "Facing It" by Yusef Komunyakaa. It's pretty sad but it's also a great way of explaining how the wall affects veterans and families. At first the speaker explains how he gets lost "inside" (2) the walls. When he's lost, he finds himself trying not to cry. The wall reminds him of the hardships he endured at war. Before he came, he knew that seeing the wall and fading inside of it would bring back strong emotions. The speaker never directly says that which shows that he had tried to prepare especially when he says, "I said I wouldn't" (3). The fact that he compares himself to a "bird of prey" (7) parallels to what he was in the war. When he was a solider, he probably felt like bird always looking for either a dead, dying, or alive victim to devour. The small creatures fear the birds that eat them. But at the same time, everyone out there was a bird of prey which cannot exactly provide the best comfort. The speaker talks like when he is looking at the wall, the wall is holding him ever so tightly in his grasp but when he turns away, it lets him go. The speaker can potentially be saying that when he's there at the wall, his mind is infected with all these swarming memories but as soon as he's ready to turn away, they leave. He might be commenting on how we aren't affected by all the details of a memory every day but how we are when we focus and return to a certain state of mind. As the speaker reads over the "58,022" (14) engraved names, he seems to be looking for his own. He even is "expecting" (15) to see it as if he's still amazed at how he is still alive. I mean, considering how many people were killed during this war and being a survivor and going back to "visit" everyone has to make you think that you're still with them. But is he wishing he had died with them? Thinking about everything those soldiers had to come back to after putting themselves out there and seeing things that we don't even want to ever think about makes me wonder if the speaker had wished he had died there versus coming back. As he touches the name of a fellow soldier, the moment rushes back to him when he was with that soldier. The fact that the veteran is strong enough to even go back and be okay after a tsunami of feelings and memories already shows a lot about his character. The idea of "Facing It", it being the war, being the emotions, being the memories, has to be one of the hardest things the speaker has to do after the war. The wall captures him and his mind. In a split second, it springs back all of the feelings the speaker had. "Facing It" is one of the hardest things the speaker has to do.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)