We have read many texts this semester and explored many themes. As this is the last blog for the semester, it is time to reflect. Look at all that we have read this year and make a connection between Hamlet and one other text from this semester. How are they the same and how are they different?
In doing this comparison, think about the themes, big ideas, characters, struggles, language. In your post, explain what you want to say about Hamlet in one paragraph, explain the second text in another paragraph, and then explain the connection in the third paragraph. Use quotes from both to back up your argument.
Readers have never known the version of Hamlet with his father alive. When the story begins, King Hamlet has already died and Hamlet’s Uncle Claudius is now king. King Hamlet’s death happened to Hamlet at a young age, and it affected him in many ways throughout Shakespeare’s play. He was forced to go through the hardships to follow without his father, and he tried his best to make him proud and to avenge his death properly. Hamlet says this while talking to his mother: “Together with all forms, moods, shapes of grief, that can denote me truly” (1. 2. 85-86). He is deeply grieving for his mother, an emotion that carries throughout the entire play.
ReplyDeleteAlthough both Wes Moores grew up without a father, the one that connects best to Hamlet is author Wes Moore, whose father died when Wes was very young. Wes watched his father die, and it will carry with him for the rest of his life. Moore writes, “His normally strong features sagged in exhaustion, as if he were in the final hours of a battle he had been fighting for years” (13). Although Wes did not understand his father’s death at the time, he would eventually and it would help him in his struggle to become successful. His father's death served as a motivation to become as good of a man and husband as his father once was.
Both of these stories share a common characteristic of the main character: a man who lost a father at too young of an age. Hamlet and Wes are forced to carry on without their parent, and often struggle on how to fill the void that has appeared. Hamlet and The Other Wes Moore share a common theme of overcoming what you must in order to survive. Hamlet knew that his duty was to avenge his father, and Wes knew that his duty was to make his dad proud. The big idea of both books revolve around achieving what one must achieve, and both characters did achieve their goals, making their fathers proud in the process. Hamlet was able to kill Claudius and avenge his father, while Wes was able to become successful and care for his family. Both experienced hardships along the way: Hamlet struggling to find the will and confidence, Wes struggling to get out of his bad childhood situation. Both were able to overcome their troubles, and because of that I think their similarities are great.
In Hamlet we see a clear internal struggle that of character. Hamlet has to decide whether or not to become a killer and seek the revenge on his father. We see him question his actions when he says, “I'll observe his looks/I'll tent him to the quick.If he do blench,/ I know my course” (2.2.625-627). Hamlet wants to be sure that he the King murdered his father before he takes his life, so he measures his reaction from the play. However, we also see a very childish part of Hamlet. He acts without patience and doesn't think about all the things that he is doing. When he kills Polonius he didn't bother to check that it was the King. In one scene, Hamlet also contemplates the idea of suicide and whether or not life's worth living. In his soliloquy he says “To die, to sleep-/ To sleep, perchance to dream” (3.1.72-73). Because of his inner conflict, Hamlet doesn't know if it is worth living any more and wonders if he should just take his own life. The language in Hamlet is Shakespeare so it carries the story in different manner, and portray a more poetic sense. Similar ideas are seen in A Clockwork Orange.
ReplyDeleteIn A Clockwork Orange, Alex is an immature child who has no regard for the lives of others. He lives his life in violence and it ends up destroying him. When he struggled with the old lady he said the he, “...cracked her a fine fair tolchock on the gulliver and that shut her up real horrorshow and lovely” (Burgess 69). Later in the novel, however, he changes due to the treatment and is no longer able to perform violent acts. He has an internal conflict of good and evil that eats at him. The language that Burgess uses is very unique to the novel, as it is a made of version of Russian and English (NADSAT). It makes the novel more interesting and shows the personality of the character. Often times he is misunderstood by the people around him because it is used as slang for the younger children. The adults in the novel don't understand his words, much like they don't understand him. Due to his internal conflict Alex also contemplates suicide. He manages to attempt it and says, “I jumped, O my brothers, and I fell on the sidewalk hard, but I did not snuff it, oh no” (Burgess 189). The pain and struggle that he was facing became unbearable and he tried to end the suffering but was unsuccessful in killing himself. Alex also demonstrates a very childish behavior and by the end of the novel learns to grow up. He says “Perhaps I was getting too old for the sort of jeezy I had been leading, brothers” (Burgess 210). He realizes that the actions had made in the past were immature and that he needed to grow up. The ideas seen in A Clockwork Orange are similar to those in Hamlet.
In both writings, the characters display a childish behavior. That act quickly and impatiently. Without thinking, they take action and it often leads to a death. In the case of murder however, Hamlet is doing it out of revenge and for his father. Alex kills on accident and doesnt care about the consequences of his actions. Both characters end up struggling with the decisions that they have to make and what actions they should take. Hamlet struggles to decide if he should kill his uncle, while Alex struggles to go about his life after being conditioned to only do good. These conflicts lead to their thoughts of suicide. Hamlet discusses it in his soliloquy, but he never acts upon it. He ends up dying in his battle with Laertes, in a more noble way. Alex on the the other hand, goes through with the action because he thinks it is his only option. Both writings have a distinct style of writing that captures the meaning of it. With Shakespeare's writing you see how carefully everything is said and it makes you think about it more. In Burgess writing we see the use of NADSAT, which forms a harsher tone on the story and shows how it will be darker and more unfamiliar. The unique language portrays different meanings. Both stories have different meanings, but also many similarities, which demonstrates intertextuality within the stories.
Throughout Shakespeare’s play, Hamlet, we see the ongoing theme of madness and revenge. These ideas are sparked by the inaction of Hamlet, as he does nothing about the murder of his father. He wants to seek revenge on Claudius, but is struggling to find the right time and place to carry out his vengeance. The wait is driving him mad. In his famous “to be or not to be” soliloquy, Hamlet expresses at the end, “With this regard their currents awry/And lose the name of action” (3.1.96). Later on, it is evident to the other characters, Claudius and Gertrude, that Hamlet has gone insane. Gertrude explains the condition of Hamlet: “Mad as the sea and wind when both contend/Which is the mightier. In his lawless fit,/Behind the arras hearing something stir,/Whips out his rapier, cries, “A rat, a rat!”/And in this brainish apprehension kills/The unseen good old man.” Hamlet’s madness is clear to his mother, and he could not wait any longer to kill Claudius, so he mistakenly kills Polonius. This was driven by inaction, proving that waiting around does no good.
ReplyDeleteWaiting for Godot has a similar theme and idea. Samuel Beckett’s play enforces the idea of waiting around for the future, or waiting around for something that may never happen. Main characters Vladimir and Estragon spend their repetitive days waiting under a tree for a man they have never met before. It is also expressed that these maddening days of waiting are miserable and often characterized as hell.
“Estragon: What do we do now?
Vladimir: Wait for Godot.
Estragon: Ah!
Silence
Vladimir: This is awful!” (Beckett 70).
The two are driven insane by inaction, proving that waiting around does no good.
Noticeably the two concluding sentences are identical, as the two texts parallel each other’s themes. The thought of inaction has overtaken the characters of Hamlet and Waiting For Godot. While Hamlet’s situation is much different, and he knows what he is waiting for, they both still hold commonality. Shakespeare and Beckett influence their audiences to not waste time, and act on what they want to achieve.
When beginning Hamlet, I was afraid that because I wasn’t as familiar with the story, it would be harder to understand. However after finishing Hamlet, I can say that this is my favorite work of Shakespeare so far. The play focuses on the struggle to fulfill purpose and the struggle of inaction. Prince Hamlet is given a purpose when his father asks him to seek revenge. It is then when Hamlet begins to struggle with what to do with such purpose. Shakespeare’s work delves into the madness one may suffer due to fulfilling purpose. This struggle is most famously known by Hamlet’s lines “To be or not to be- that is the question”(3.1.64). This soliloquy outlines Hamlet’s struggles and his contemplation of whether it is better to fulfill his purpose of end his life and the suffering such a purpose has caused. The play shows that when purpose consumes you, it will affect you deeply.
ReplyDeleteWithin another play we have read, Samuel Beckett’s Waiting for Godot shows the pain and ignorance that comes with inaction and the complexities that are created when a life without purpose is lead. Godot presents a question about purpose and how one can choose to ignore it or travel down a road towards it. Beckett explains that purpose is needed in life, no matter the form, for a purpose is the essence of a man’s life. In act two of Beckett’s play, the character Estragon states to Vladimir that “We always find something, eh Didi, to give us the impression we exist?”(82). Between the two men, they believe their purpose in life is in the hands of the never-present Godot. Because they take action upon this purpose, the two are meant to live a life that symbolizes the emptiness of a life without essence.
Beckett’s Waiting for Godot and Shakespeare’s Hamlet both are centered in the internal conflict of action and purpose. This question between action and inaction is one answered with the knowledge and power one has within themselves. Hamlet struggles with the choice of avenging his father and risking his life, or to end his life by his own hand, allowing himself to hold control over his life. In Godot, the two men are unable to come to terms with their goal of finding Godot and due to that, their lives are hollow, something that Hamlet feels as he waits to avenge his father. While the two share much in the way of purpose, Shakspeare digs deeper into the validity of purpose and whether or not Hamlet should act on the wishes of his father or if it even worth living a life of hatred. Both plays have impacted the way I will find and act upon my purpose in life as well as approaching the importance of having such a drive is in order to truly live life.
In Shakespeare’s Hamlet a major theme is that a person has control of themselves. No matter the events that occur to them, such as the death of a father or a murderous uncle, each character has the choice to change their circumstances. Hamlet notes, “To be, or not to be: that is the question” (63). His contemplation of life versus death and his control of those events in his and other’s lives are what drive his action throughout the play. This existentialist question is pervasive through the play and also through our semester of learning. Hamlet is also ravaged by questions, trying to determine if he is capable of killing, if he is responsible for taking action and much more. The same passage can display this inquisition as Hamlet wonders if he is responsible to handle the life of others and himself, if he is destined to kill his uncle.
ReplyDeleteIn his book Notes From The Underground Fyodor Dostoyevsky speaks all about having control of your own destiny. His narrator constantly commits acts that are disreputable purely because he wants to prove that he has control. During his explanation of his endeavors the narrator highlights, “I got to the point of feeling a sort of secret abnormal, despicable enjoyment in returning home to my corner on some disgusting Petersburg night, acutely conscious that that day I had committed a loathsome action again” (4). His absurd obsession with control displays perfectly an exaggerated form of existentialism. His desire to be so self dependent also reveals his inconsistencies as a character and a man who doubts himself. But before I mention this advantage to you, I want to compromise myself personally” (15). These two aspects of the Underground man are the pivotal plot characteristics to the book.
The existential messages and the internal struggles of the two protagonists are two similarities between the pieces of art. Hamlet comments, “To be, or not to be: that is the question...For who would bear the whips and scorns of time, The oppressor's wrong, the proud man's contumely” (63). Here Hamlet is showing his radical stretches from suicidal thought to contemplating how to surpass the pains of losing a father and being betrayed by an uncle. These seemingly bipolar thoughts go perfectly in hand with the Underground man’s attitude. After his conversation with the prostitute Liza he worries, “At times a thought occurred to me, to go to her, ‘to tell her all,’ and beg her not to come to me. But this thought stirred such wrath in me that I believed I should have crushed that ‘damned’ Liza if she had chanced near me at the time” (77). These two men share extremely similar bipolar tendencies that put their acquaintances in danger. However despite their similar tendencies, their language is extremely different. The Underground man is full of strange vocabulary, “Then I should have chosen a career for myself, I should have been a sluggard and a glutton, not a simple one, but, for instance, one with sympathies for everything sublime and beautiful” (13). This elaborate diction that puts the Underground man aloft is starkly contrasted by Hamlet whose diction is not as eloquent. “Let the doors be shut upon him, that he may play the fool no where but in's own house” (65). This simpler diction makes Hamlet seem younger and also have less authority which is ironic since the underground man has no power and Hamlet has quite a bit more. This shows the discrepancy and disparity of their characters, desiring to be something they aren’t.
I have always enjoyed reading Shakespeare and unpacking the old English language to understand the in-depth meaning of the text. Hamlet has an inner conflict going on between what he wants to do and what he should do. Hamlet’s mind continuously contemplates his actions even though his heart tries to convince him that he is ready to take revenge on his Uncle Claudius. He knows that he must avenge his father’s death, but he also doesn’t want to go through the drudgery of life. In fact, Hamlet states, “Whether ‘tis nobler in the mind to suffer...Or to take arms against a sea of troubles” (Shakespeare 3.1.65). The “sea of troubles” has to do with his mother immediately marrying his uncle and the murder of his father by Claudius. His inner struggle stems from the conflict between of his instinct and consciousness. His inaction due to not being at the right time or place delays his revenge.
ReplyDeleteIn “Waiting for Godot”, Vladimir and Estragon want to act to find Godot, but they never truly make the effort. Their inaction leads to a prolonged waiting for something to happen, but that event never happens. As a result, their life is circular as they know nothing else but what they do everyday, sitting around the same tree and talking about the same things. In Waiting for God, it states, "Let's go. Yes, let's go. (They do not move)” (Beckett 45). Although their mind tells them to leave and look for Godot, their body doesn’t make them move. However, Vladimir starts to doubt their lifestyle and wants to start living with meaning in his life. He initiates the search for Godot and wants to do something with their lives, instead of waiting for Godot and making them feel miserable.
Both Vladimir and Estragon and Hamlet are endued with contemplation and inaction that keeps them from doing what they truly want to do. They all have an inner conflicts that prevent them from realizing their purpose and moving on with their lives. Hamlet has the ability to control his fate and the fate of the others around him based on the decisions he makes. Vladimir and Estragon have the power to continue with their lives and be able to push themselves to make an effort. Hamlet believes that it may be better to die than to experience misery in life and get through struggles. In the same way, Vladimir and Estragon would rather continue the lives they are living than search for their purpose.
Throughout the play Hamlet by William Shakespeare, Hamlet is driven to be pure and transparent in nature, in order to represent a true person, since so many people around him hide their true intentions. Hamlet exclaims his truthful identity by contrasting it with Claudius’ when he says, “These indeed seem, / For they are actions that a man might play; / But I have that within which passes show, / These but the trappings and the suits of woe” (Shakespeare 1.2.83-86). Hamlet refers to Claudius’ acts as “actions that a man might play” to create a pun on the fact that Claudius is many times acting as a righteous man when he truly is not. Hamlet uses this antithesis as a stepping stone to strengthen his appeal as a truthful and transparent man because he “passes show.” What is ironic later on in the play is that Hamlet must cover his true identity in order to elicit the truth from Claudius. When Hamlet acts in the play to unveil the truth about his father’s death, he is conceals his true nature to bait Claudius into a trap. This reversal of Hamlet’s mindset brings up the thought that Hamlet has betrayed his own words so that he can seek revenge, which shows the true power that revenge has over people.
ReplyDeleteIn Ralph Ellison’s Invisible Man, the Invisible Man struggles with finding his true identity. After the Invisible Man breaks free from the Brotherhood, he is truly free, yet soon decides to hide his real appearance. During this time, the Invisible Man takes on the persona of Rinehart who is an embodiment of a man that can do anything. The Invisible Man describes Rinehart as “Rine the runner and Rine the gambler and Rine the briber and Rine the lover and Rinehart the Reverend?...His world was possibility and he knew it” (Ellison 498). Rinehart’s persona showed the Invisible Man a taste of what freedom has to offer, but in order for this to occur, the Invisible Man had to hide his real appearance.
In both texts, the authors use irony with appearance and identity to further the character’s agenda. Both authors may be using this to show that humanity, while it aims to be perfect, must commit acts that they don’t agree with in order to progress as a society. Hamlet was able to reveal the truth about Claudius murdering his father by acting, and similarly the Invisible Man was able to unveil his true potential by taking on Rinehart’s persona. While the Invisible Man benefited from this tremendously, some underlying problems have plagued Hamlet from his untruthful acts. Hamlet pretending to be crazy may have caused him to view the world in a manic way, which brings up the question: Should we sacrifice our true nature in order to succeed?
Deception and manipulation are both themes that course throughout the plot of Shakespeare’s “Hamlet”. In the novel, Hamlet goes on a quest to uncover the truth about his father’s death. However, this aspiration becomes complicated further and further as he is incessantly deceived and manipulated by Claudius. Claudius not only manipulates Hamlet, but he also manipulates the entire population of Denmark by choosing to kill Hamlet instead of confessing his “sins” in order to hide his dirty deeds: “Our sovereign process, which imports at full,/By letters congruing to that effect,/The present death of Hamlet” (4.4.72-74). Although Hamlet searches for truth and honesty in the face of deception, he, ironically, implements deceit and manipulation into his own strategy. Hamlet's madness is an act of deception, incorporated to draw attention away from his suspicious activities as he gathers evidence against his uncle:
ReplyDeleteHow strange or odd soe'er I bear myself,
. . .
That you, at such times seeing me, never shall,
With arms encumber'd thus, or this head-shake,
Or by pronouncing of some doubtful phrase,
As 'Well, well, we know'; or 'We could, an if we would';
Or 'If we list to speak'; or 'There be, an if they might';
Or such ambiguous giving out, to note
That you know aught of me: this is not to do (1.5.188-198)
Ralph Ellison’s “Invisible Man” has the same themes driving the plot of its novel. In this novel, the individuals are not being manipulated and deceived by an external force, their deception actually arises from their prejudice and inability to see individuals for who they truly are. As a result of individuals failing to see the Invisible Man for who he truly is, he is constantly misused by others: “But don't you think he should be a little blacker? “(Ellison 223). In this quote, Emily illustrates that the Brotherhood solely chose the Invisible Man not because of the unique attributes that he offers but simply because he is an African American individual who they can manipulate in any way to deliver their message to a large audience. They not only manipulate the Invisible Man, but they also deceive their audience by making it seem that they care about African Americans when all they really care about is their own agenda: “say what the people want to hear, but say it in such a way that they’ll do exactly what we wish” (Ellison 359). Additionally, the Invisible Man also partakes in this deception. Upon discovering his invisibility, the Invisible Man deceives Sybil in order to obtain information about the Brotherhood that he could use against them: “I would have avoided [her] like the plague. But now her unhappiness and the fact that she was one of the big shot's wives made her a perfect choice“(Ellison 354).
The themes in both texts parallel one another as the main characters characters undergo a process of overcoming deceptions and illusions to reach the truth. However, both characters also implement the same deceptions and manipulation techniques that they are running from to uncover the truth that they are searching for. The manipulation and deception that the Invisible Man and Hamlet execute are similar because they utilize them to uncover a truth that is particularly meaningful to themselves. The texts differ in the how others experience and execute deception and manipulation. In Hamlet, the deception and manipulation is executed by Claudius to hide his past sins, maintain his new title as king, and to protect himself and his new wife, Gertrude. However; in Invisible Man society’s manipulation and deception originates from their prejudice and is used to further an individual’s personal agenda.
Hamlet is undoubtedly a proponent of action, despite his indecisiveness. He sees the actions of Fortinbras as “divine ambition puffed”, leading us to believe that Hamlet views action as a god-like quality. In Hamlet’s eyes, action is revered, and almost sacred. Why, then, does Hamlet take so long to decide that he wants to kill his uncle? In his soliloquy, we learn the answer to this question: Hamlet is scared. He is scared of oppression, death, and even his own thoughts. Hamlet is aware of his cowardice, thus coining the phrase “thus conscience does make cowards of us all”, and he often attempts to push through his indecisiveness with bursts of bravery. It is only after the inspiration found from Fortinbras and his similar situation that he is able to make a choice and take action accordingly.
ReplyDeleteEstragon and Vladimir in Samuel Beckett’s Waiting For Godot are accustomed to inaction. In fact, the entire basis of the play is inaction, and the cyclical nature of waiting. In many cases, the characters make the decision to leave, but cannot find the ability to make the action required to do so: “I’m going [He does not move]”. The words spoken by the characters are empty because they do not lead to anything significant. Thus, the lives of the characters are insignificant.
If I analyze both of these texts in tandem with one another, it can be concluded that it is not necessarily inaction that Hamlet fears, but rather an insignificant existence. He fears death only because it may take him before he completes meaningful action. In the graveyard, Hamlet looks to the bones and sees lives that were wasted: “...Alexander died, Alexander was buried, Alexander returneth to dust…”. Hamlet fears oblivion. He bears witness to a human life turned into something futile and useless, like dust, which catapults his action into a matter of justice to a matter of humanity. Without the vengeance of his father, Hamlet is nothing but a school boy. Hamlet needs justice, not only for his father, but also for his significance as a human being.
Throughout the play Hamlet is in a state of conflicted madness. Hamlet is faced with an inner struggle because of his uncle's betrayal. Hamlet is unsure if the ghost he saw is actually his father and if he should seek revenge against Claudius. Driven to madness, Hamlet gives his ‘to be or not to be” soliloquy in which he states, “To die, to sleep/ To sleep perchance to dream” (3.1.72-73). Hamlet contemplates whether he should taking his own life to end the suffering or cease the opportunity to kill Claudius. As Hamlet struggles with his madness, Claudius continues to betray him by poisoning the sword that Laertes will use in their duel and not informing Gertrude before she drank the poisoned wine. The only thing that Claudius ever cared about was gaining power. Hamlet’s hatred and distrust of Claudius leads to his own demise.
ReplyDeleteIn Ralph Ellison’s “Invisible Man” the narrator's actions were controlled by the way he was viewed by the people around him. After being forced to leave the university, Dr. Bledsoe promises the narrator that he will help him find a job and allow him to return to the university the following fall. However, Dr. Bledsoe does the exact opposite. Dr. Bledsoe writes, “The bearer of this letter is a former student of our (I say former because he shall never, under any circumstances be enrolled as a student here again) who has been expelled for a most serious defection from our strictest rules of deportment” (Ellison 190). Dr. Bledsoe did not care if the narrator found a job and never intended on helping him just like the Brotherhood was only using him. Due to prejudice and unfair treatment the invisible man was unable to form a place in society. Constant betrayal insured that the narrator man will live a life of invisibility.
In both stories the betrayal of the main character leads to their downfall. Hamlet's obsession with avenging his father's death leads him to his own death. Dr. Bledsoe betrayal of the invisible man forces him to conform to others ideas and accept his place in society. Both of the character lives were dictated by those around them. Whether they are being outcasted due to madness or prejudice, the characters are unable to overcome the betrayal and views of others.
In William Shakespeare’s play, Hamlet, the title character often criticizes himself and questions his purpose in life. He chastises himself for his indecisiveness and cowardice when he wants to avenge his father’s death, but delays his actions. He asks, “Am I a coward? / Who calls me ‘villain’? Breaks my pate across? / Plucks off my beard and blows it in my face? / Tweaks me by the nose? gives me the lie i’ th’ throat as deep as to the lungs? Who does me this?” (II.ii.598-602). Hamlet states that he poses no threat to others, therefore he should be deemed weak. He casts this self-hatred onto others, causing them to fear him. When Ophelia tries to return something of his, he tricks her into lying to him and insults her, saying, “Get thee to a nunnery. Why wouldst thou be / a breeder of sinners? I am myself indifferent honest, / but yet I could accuse me of such things that it / Were better my mother had not borne me” (III.i.131-134). He claims that she is dishonest, but he is cognizant of his flaws and claims he is ambitious and intelligent. Hamlet has a superiority complex, and will criticize himself in private, but reprimand others and glorify himself in public.
ReplyDeleteIn Fyodor Dostoevsky’s novel, Notes from the Underground, the main character is a complex hermit who enjoys pain and suffering. He justifies his masochistic tendencies by claiming that he finds the beauty in the simplicity of even the toothache. He also criticizes himself, comparing himself to animals the general population finds disgusting. Specifically, he relates to a mouse, highly conscious and hides in his hole to avoid humiliation (I.iii.1-2). This isolation is where the Underground Man breeds self-loathing for himself as he criticizes both himself and others. The main recipient of the Underground Man’s anger is Liza, a prostitute whom he uses as his emotional punching bag, of sorts. He takes out his frustration on her, projecting his negative thoughts, seeing her only as a prostitute and claiming her work to be “the same as selling your soul to the devil”, all while claiming that he loves her (II.vi.84). His unhealthy relationship with Liza shows that he casts his anger at himself onto others.
Both Hamlet and the Underground Man are characters who constantly question their motives and are so perfectionistic that they criticize themselves for everything they do. This leads to them feeling depressed about themselves and hating their own being. They both scold themselves in private, but in public promote themselves to be more intelligent than and superior to others, and belittle the females close to them, Hamlet’s Ophelia and the Underground Man’s Liza. However, their perspectives differ slightly. Hamlet, being a young man, sees suicide as viable option for himself and contemplates the significance of his existence; the Underground Man believes that while he wants to maintain control of his destiny, life is full of suffering, and he must endure this suffering since he cannot control certain aspects of his life. While each character has their differences, they both possess a superiority complex that eats away at their souls, causing their relationships with others (as well as themselves) to be negatively impacted.
^ When I stated that Hamlet was a young man, I forgot to mention that for the Underground Man, he was in his forties, was more mature (depending on your connotation) and kind of saw no point in suicide
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteHamlet is a character that others constantly try to manipulate or control, as his actions are dictated by Claudius as he attempts hide Hamlet away in England, “The bark is ready and the wind at help, / th’ associates tend, and everything is bent / For England” (4. 3. 41-43), and he is also driven by his unwavering thoughts of familial pride set in place by the “justice” of his own father, “So art thou to revenge when thou shalt hear” (1. 5. 8). These are aspects of Hamlet’s life that seem to consume him, and lead to his madness. He seems to be unable to make decisions for himself, as he is constantly conflicted and hesitant in the wake of people’s control of him. For example, the entire play Hamlet obsesses over his desire to kill Claudius, to avenge his father, and then when he does nothing for the major of the play, and then tortures himself for this inaction. Overall Hamlet is a conflicted and mad character, who is constantly second guesses himself because people have made too many of his own choices in his life.
ReplyDeleteThe invisible man is a man without a backbone, he is constantly trying to please everyone around him, and allows them to make the majority of his own monumental choices in his life, “What and how much had I lost by trying to do only what was expected of me instead of what I myself had wished to do?” (Ellison 266). When under the counsel of Dr. Bledsoe he is simply shipped to New York and quickly gives up his college orientated dreams, and then almost as swiftly he in absorbed into the brotherhood and he allows them to completely change him, even forfeiting his own name. In the end he has lost himself and become invisible when he let others change him into what was “expected of” him, as he was unable to see himself or make his own decisions without the guidance of others. He is so far off that he ends up in a hole, completely alone, and that is the only true way he can find himself.
Hamlet and the invisible man have much in common, they are people who are completely submerged in what is the right thing to do, that in the end they are destroyed by this obsession. Hamlet is completely driven mad and killed by protecting his father’s honor, and the invisible man was ruined and place in a hole, where he also grasped at the edges of insanity, on account of his obsession with what he thought others would want him to do, what was the “correct” manner of life. They are both men who are torn apart because of others, and both share hesitation because of their dependency on others to make their decision, leading to their oddly similar downfalls.
In Shakespeare’s Hamlet, the protagonist, Hamlet, is enduring an internal conflict that causes him to go into madness. He is convinced that his uncle, Claudius, is to blame for the death of his father, encouraging him to seek revenge over his uncle. In doing so, he becomes highly conscious of his actions and the consequences that could follow. In the iconic “To Be or Not To Be” soliloquy, Hamlet is trying to calculate which is a better way to deal with the problems of life: “ Whether ‘tis nobler in the mind to suffer/ The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune,/Or to take arms against a sea of troubles/ And, by opposing, end them. (3.1.65-68). His mind goes back and forth, discovering the pros and cons of each action, but also causing a sense of contradiction. If he were to kill Claudius, he would somehow be saving his after life, while endangering his own. If he were to kill himself, there would be no harm towards Claudius and would put himself through the gates of hell for committing suicide. With the mad mindset Hamlet is in at this time, he makes to decision to carry on his plan for revenge, but also loses more people than he intended.
ReplyDeleteIn Notes From the Underground by Dostoevsky, the main character is a bitter man who makes his decisions based on his heightened consciousness. He is a person a to overthink about every little interaction he may have with society and to do things out of spite. This causes him to take action that contradicts what he is saying throughout the novel: “ But what made me furious was that I knew I would certainly go; I would go on purpose; and the more tactless, the more improper it was for me to go, the sooner I would go.” ( Dostoevsky 66). In this quote, the man says to himself how much he does not want to go, nor does he care to go to the outing. The fact that he was at first excluded from going, made him want to go despite his true feelings. This shows how he changed his opinions and actions to prove others wrong and to, most of the time, cause trouble in the situation he puts himself into.
Hamlet and the Underground Man are similar in the way that they both think one thing, but then do the opposite of what they intended. In Hamlet, he worries about the consequences of the Claudius’ death but decides to continue on his plot for revenge. In doing so, he hurts many other of his close friends and family. In the case of the Underground Man, he speaks down on society and highlights how he wants no human interaction. In contradiction to this statement, the Underground Man places himself in social situations where he is forced to interact with others. His interaction is not healthy with other people, supporting the fact that the Underground Man brings the suffering on to himself and refuses to change. As both characters do the opposite of what they think or say, they end up hurting themselves along with the other people around them.
Hamlet's character reflects the impulsiveness of man and his struggle with reality. Hamlet willingly and with very little refuting, takes the word of a ghost, and even goes so far as to plan the murder of his own uncle on the basis of what the ghost told him. After the ghost tells Hamlet to murder Claudius, he responds saying, "Haste me to know't, that I, with wings as swift as meditation or the thoughts of love may sweep to my revenge," (Shakespeare 1.5.35-37). He so openly accepts the request of this ghost, despite the horrible act it is requesting of him, simply because he believes it to be the spirit of his father. This shows how Hamlet is blatantly misguided in terms of reality, as well as how dangerously impulsive he can be.
ReplyDeleteIn Samuel Beckett's Waiting for Godot, Estragon and Vladimir represent the very primal, and at times unintelligent side of human nature. The two are in a constant state of confusion, and cannot wrap their heads around where they are, what time it is, what day it is, etc. They are severely out of touch with reality, and act strictly based on the current moment. While discussing the tree that is now covered with leaves, but yesterday was black and bare, Estragon says, "It must be the Spring," (Beckett 56). This is an example of how the two men severely unaware of the world around them, and can make themselves believe anything based off of the slightest evidence that it may be.
Both of these texts are alike in that their main characters aim to show the impulsive and semi-aloof nature of man. Hamlet's quite immediate trust in a ghost that claimed to be his father, followed by his decision to plot the murder of his uncle, as well as Vladimir and Estragon's blind trust that Godot is coming and their constant confusion with their setting show such impulsiveness and aloof-ness.
In Shakespeare’s play “Hamlet” the main character struggles with many things both internally and externally. One of Hamlet’s biggest and most obvious struggles is the fact that his Uncle Claudius not only killed Hamlet’s father, but went on to marry his mother as well. This struggle causes him to act as if he is mad, and as the play continues the audience sees Hamlet’s fake madness becoming more real as he has more difficulties plotting revenge on his uncle than he had anticipated. Hamlet had an opportunity to kill Claudius as he was praying, but decides he should “know thou a more horrid hent” (Shakespeare. 3. 3. 92.). This inaction is what causes Hamlet’s madness to spiral out of control as he has trouble waiting to avenge the death of his father.
ReplyDeleteIn Samuel Beckett’s “Waiting for Godot” the two main characters Vladimir and Estragon are stuck repeating the previous day almost exactly over and over again. The repetition in the play puts emphasis on the state of mind the two characters are in as well as their choice to wait rather than act. As the audience sees the play it becomes quite clear Vladimir and Estragon are confused about why they are waiting for a man named Godot as they ask questions such as “What exactly did we ask him for?” (Beckett 10) and “We’ve lost our rights?” (Beckett 11). The pair do not understand why they are waiting for Godot, only that they must be waiting for him because it is important. This continuous act of inaction leads the characters to repeat practically identical days over and over, leading them into a sort of madness.
As one looks at the two books together it can be noticed that inaction is the cause of madness for the main characters in both texts. The madness that each character has leads to similar thoughts for them in each play. In Hamlet as well as in Waiting for Godot the main characters contemplate the act of suicide. This thought in both texts is caused by the madness the characters have due to the inaction they chose over action. In Hamlet the thoughts of suicide explore the difference between suffering during life or ending it in a sinful manner while the suicidal mentions in Waiting for Godot were mentioned as more of a time passing. In each case the mention of suicide helps emphasize the madness of the main characters.
In Hamlet he struggles with a person vs. supernatural conflict with his father as a ghost. Hamlet encounters his father’s ghost and all suspicion he had was proven true. Hamlet has to struggle with the new of his father’s murder, and getting revenge on the new king. This is a person vs. supernatural as Hamlet makes the decision to obey the ghost’s commands. Hamlet both wants to take revenge on Claudius, but at the same time if skeptical of the ghost’s message. He struggles to make an actual decision. Action and dramatic development within the play are both reliant on Hamlet’s internal conflict; whether he should avenge his father’s death, and even given the weighted responsibilities tied to the act, if he should instead take his own life. He is often lost within his pensive contemplations, and consequently procrastinates in taking action until he believes he knows all of the facts.
ReplyDeleteMost of Notes from Underground is made up of the underground man’s rambling thoughts. There is little real action in the plot. This is because, there is little action in the underground man’s life. As he himself says, he is a man of “overly acute consciousness,” and his excessive intelligence basically cripples him. He overt hinks and questions everything, and cannot settle on a “primary cause” of anything that would then allow him to decide what action to take. Similarly, he believes that men of action often act out of a simplistic idea of justice that they think justifies their actions. The underground man, by contrast, cannot settle for an overly simplistic understanding of justice. He thinks things over ceaselessly and sometimes ponders things so much that he changes his mind or contradicts himself. Thus, he can find no basis for acting in a particular way, since he can easily argue himself out of doing something.
What makes Hamlet most interesting, in my eyes, is the philosopher in him, inherent in his lines. His philosophy is one of paradox and will. He is a man who must fight his own cowardice and strive towards what he knows must be done. He has the strongest of faiths in his feeling that revenge is needed. He separates himself from those cowards . In his mind, his reason to kill is greater and nobler than that of Fortinbras’s men. Therefore, as De Silentio (pseudonym of Kierkegaard) wrote in his dialectic “Fear and Trembling”, a man who places his faith in the absurd is greater than the man who places his faith in assuring, earthly reason. Hamlet is a man who has placed his faith in revenge. He fights to his end for a ghost, for what is dead and can never be anything other than dead. He looks down on those fighting for a “fantasy and trick of fame”(Shakespeare 4.4.64), yet their reasons are of the greater benefit than those for which Hamlet shall suffer.
ReplyDeleteDostoevsky's protagonist, in Notes from Underground, is much a philosopher himself, presenting the first part of his writing as a dialectic. Yet unlike Hamlet’s philosophical soliloquies, which occasionally prefigure Nietzche in their celebration of man’s strength, so heavily they lie in debt to the notion that reasoning and thought without action are nothing: “Sure He that made us[...]gave us not/That capability and godlike reason/To fust in us unused”(Shakespeare 4.4.38-41), Dostoevsky’s Underground Man is not successful in his attempt to play the noble to the downtrodden Liza. Hamlet, by the end of the play seen as a hero by Fortinbras and his men, whereas Dostoevsky’s Underground Man retreats to his absurd labyrinthine memoirs, too vast to publish and without end. Dostoevsky’s protagonist expresses throughout the text the notion that a man like him is inferior to a man of action, undeterred by any cold sense of rationality(Dostoevsky 1.3.1). Hamlet in this respect, while tragic, succeeds in relation to the Underground Man as an absurd protagonist. He-like Abraham- places his utmost faith in the absurd, and acts to such an extent, employing his greatest reason and strength to these means.
Similitude between the two texts, of so different time and so different a place, lies in the philosophy of the texts’ two respective protagonists. The two are truly proto-existentialists. Yet they should be linked more to the thought of Kierkegaard than that of Camus and Sartre. Both essentially believe that a man’s greatness is weighed by the greatness of his cause. The two men try to play the heroes in their tales. In answer to the Underground Man’s query “which is better-cheap happiness of sublime suffering?”( Dostoevsky 2.10.12),each would likely offer a similar reply. The reasoning is similar, but the actions are what separate the men. The two men, like Kierkegaard’s Abraham of “Fear and Trembling” find nobility in suffering for what is absurd.