On Hamlet

So, I wrote this essay for my Renaissance Lit class, and I thought you one person who happens to have stumbled upon my little blog might find it interesting. You know I write for my readers.....well not really because I am not sure that I have readers, but here goes.

Hamlet’s Descent

            During the course of William Shakespeare’s play Hamlet, Hamlet, the main character descends into undeniable madness. At which point he becomes “mad” is a point of contention. By the end of the play disasters have ravaged his mind so that little semblance of order remains. He may still be able to think logically, to a certain degree, but he no longer has room for human empathy. He has suffered too much emotionally. There are three main characters that lead to or contributed to his demise: the ghost of Hamlet senior, his father; Polonius, his lover’s father; and Claudius, his uncle and stepfather, the King.

            The play begins two months after Hamlet senior has died. A month ago his mother married Claudius, Hamlet’s uncle. Hamlet does not approve of the marriage and believes it was arranged too hastily. He feels that there is nothing he can do about it because his uncle is the King and it is treasonous to speak against him. Hamlet has his first reason to question his sanity when the ghost of his father appears. The ghost tells Hamlet that Claudius killed him by pouring poison into his ear. Other characters, namely Horatio, Hamlet’s best friend, see the ghost but it does not speak to them. All they hear it say is, “Swear.” (1.5.175) Hamlet knows that seeing the ghost doesn’t make him crazy. What he is worried about is what would happen if he believed the ghost.

            Hamlet must decide whether or not the ghost is an amiable spirit or an evil one. The ghost admits to being in purgatory, so it really could go either way. For Hamlet to even consider avenging his father’s death is treasonous. Everything about the ghost is wrong, what it suggests and its very presence. If Hamlet kills Claudius as the ghost suggests, he will go to Hell. Hamlet is conflicted about whether or not the murder would be worth Hell. This doubt in the ghost and himself guides Hamlet down a road to madness.

            Hamlet hears a player recite a monologue about Hecuba when her husband was slain by Pyrrhus. Hamlet is so moved by the monologue that he wishes he had the same power of speech and feeling that the player has. He does not know what to feel or do in his own life, and this player has rendered such emotion in a story that does not even concern him. Hamlet is jealous about the player’s control and power over emotion. “A broken voice, and his whole function suiting, with forms to his conceit—and all for nothing! For Hecuba!What’s Hecuba for him, or he to Hecuba?” (2.2.583-586)

Hamlet continues to lament how he has actual reason and drive for such emotion yet he can’t display it effectively, or at all. He would like to be able to convince the court and all of Claudius’s supporters that Claudius murdered his father. But even Hamlet is not sure if he believes it. He is still worried that the ghost is an evil fiend. Hamlet goes to see Ophelia, his lover, for comfort.

Ophelia has been speaking with her father, Polonius. Polonius tells her that Hamlet does not love her, that he is just currently infatuated but that he will move on. He also points out that Hamlet may not get to chose his bride because he is crown prince of Denmark and princes do not get to chose who they marry. Ophelia, dutiful daughter that she is, does not speak to Hamlet. After Hamlet leaves, she tells her father of his visit. Polonius instructs her to give Hamlet’s love letters back to him. Once again, Ophelia obeys.

When Hamlet realizes that Ophelia is rejecting his love, that she is choosing her father over him, he is distraught. He tells Ophelia that he no longer loves her and that he never loved her in the first place. “You should not have believed me, for virtue cannot so inoculate our old stock but we shall relish of it. I loved you not.” (3.1.127-129) He wants her to leave, to go a nunnery so that she will learn to never let men beguile her into loving them.

Polonius has robbed Hamlet of his one love. If Polonius had not told Ophelia to return the letters, Ophelia and Hamlet may have been able to rely on each other to stay sane. Instead of staying in his place Polonius plunged head first into issues without considering other angles. He tells Gertrude, Hamlet’s mother, how to treat Hamlet. “Look you lay home to him. Tell him his pranks have been too broad to bear with and that your Grace hath screened and stood between much heat and him.” (3.4.1-6) Polonius hides in the Queen’s drapes when Hamlet comes to speak to her. Hamlet hears him stir and kills him, believing Polonius to be Claudius.

Hamlet is a little thrown from killing the wrong man, but he takes it in stride and continues his conversation with his mother. This dismissive attitude toward the death of a human is the first clear sign of Hamlet’s erosion of empathy. It is marked by the reappearance of the ghost, Hamlet senior. Only Hamlet can see it. It says nothing, but it is there, at least in Hamlet’s mind. The ghost represents Hamlet’s loss of connection to human empathy and emotion; it signals that Hamlet is withdrawing into himself and is less concerned with right and wrong. When Hamlet leaves his mother’s room he drags Polonius’s dead body out saying, “This man shall set me packing. I’ll lug his guts into the neighbor room.” (3.4.234-234)

Gertrude tells her new husband, Claudius, about Hamlet’s slaughter of Polonius. Claudius decides that Hamlet is much too dangerous to remain in Denmark  so he sends him to England with Rosencrantz, Guildenstern, and a note asking the English to kill Hamlet. Claudius is the main cause of Hamlet’s madness. He murdered Hamlet senior; he married Gertrude, Hamlet’s mother; and he ordered Hamlet to be killed.

Claudius is the catalyst for Hamlet’s demise. He has no regard for the effect his actions have on other characters’ emotional stability. His chief concern is for himself. He killed the king and married the queen. He goes along with Polonius’s scheme to separate Hamlet and Ophelia, just to see if Hamlet is mad because of love. Hamlet and Claudius have no love or respect for each other. But at least Hamlet originally had reservations about killing Claudius. Claudius just does not care. Once he has written the letter asking for Hamlet’s death he says, “By letters congruing to that effect, the present death of Hamlet. Do it, England, for like the hectic in my blood he rages, and thou must cure me. Till I know ‘tis done, howe’er my haps, my joys, were ne’er begun.” (4.4.72-78).

Hamlet may be losing or have lost his ability to care, but he has not lost his ability to reason. He knows that Claudius means to have him killed. He reads the letter that has his death sentence and calmly adjusts it so that Rosencrantz and Guildenstern will meet their demise in England instead. Hamlet returns to Denmark.

It is when Hamlet first returns to Denmark that we see his last vestiges of feeling for his fellow humans. He happens upon gravediggers who are digging Ophelia’s grave. They tell him whom the skulls in the grave belong to. One of them was the court jester from when Hamlet was a boy. Hamlet recollects about the fun times he shared with the jester. He gets quite emotional, he holds the skull in front of him and speaks to it and about it, “He hath bore me on his back a thousand times, and now how abhorred in my imagination it is! My gorge rises at it. Here hung those lips I have kissed I know not how oft. Where be your gibes now? your gambols?” (5.1.191-196)

Hamlet learns of Ophelia’s death as she is being laid into the ground. Laertes, Ophelia’s brother, attacks Hamlet. Laertes has reasons enough; Hamlet killed his father, Polonius, abandoned his sister, and forgot that he had killed Polonius. Hamlet does not understand why Laertes assaults him. Hamlet feels that Laertes attacks him because of Ophelia’s death, “Hear you sir, what is the reason you use me thus? I loved you ever. But it is no matter. Let Hercules himself do what he may, the cat will mew the dog will have his day.”

Claudius fuels Laertes’s anger so that he might beat Hamlet in a duel. Claudius is still set on having Hamlet killed. Laertes, wracked by grief and propelled by Claudius’s cajoling decides to duel Hamlet. He even puts poison on the end of his blade so that if he even scratches Hamlet he will die.

The poisoned blade is ultimately Laertes’s undoing as it is Hamlet’s. They both die by the blade. As he dies, Laertes confesses his dishonorable maneuver and Hamlet acknowledges it. But he does not let Claudius off so easily. Claudius had poisoned a cup of wine so that if Hamlet drank it he would die. Instead the queen drinks it and she dies. Hamlet, in his final burst of energy before death, chokes, stabs, and forces Claudius to drink his own poison. “Here thou incestuous, murderous, damned Dane, Drink of this potion. Is thy union here?” Hamlet pours the last drops of poison into Claudius’s mouth, “Follow my mother.” (5.2.356-357) Hamlet no longer has any reservations in murder. Claudius is the fifth and last person he kills in the play.

Hamlet’s emotions were unstable at the beginning of the play. Because of the other characters’ meddling he is pushed further and further away from human compassion. The ghost starts Hamlet’s mind on the path of treachery and Polonius and Claudius just keep giving him cause to continue down the road.

Crap

Well, when I first clicked on this I thought that I would be editing the whole blog thing. Meaning, I could change the title. But, that is not the case. So, I will write a blog post about it.
My problem is that I have a great idea, I am suddenly inspired. My whole face transforms, I smile, my eyes widen, my eyebrows go up, the whole bit. This blog with one or two post was one of those ideas. I was like, "I know, I will write detailed reviews of all the books I read. I read tons of books and I have very biased and insightful opinions, why not share?
Well, here is the reason. I don't think to write in a blog about books, actually, I don't think to write in a blog about anything. I have tried numerous types of blogs, I tried writing an ongoing story, each post was like an episode. But that was dumb. I have tried writing about me, but that was dumb too. I think about me enough, I don't need to write about me too. Why would I want to force someone to read inane episodes of my life. And when I get into college, I will be thrilled. Those close to me will be thrilled to. But the most I could muster for a blog post in the event that I actually do post something during that time period is. "YAY I got into _________ university/college. I am so excited, I start this fall!!!! I can't wait." Who wants to read that? It is what everyone says, but everyone says it because what else are you going to say? "SHUCKS! I got into the university of my dreams and now I have to go, I am so dreading it?" Well, actually maybe someone would say that. But if they did then maybe they aren't ready for college.
Anyway, this major sentence scramble that is possibly organized into semi paragraph like things is now coming to a close. I think it may have been good for me to write this, I have a little puddle of ideas forming that I could use in future blog posts. 

A Really old thought dump of mine I found

 I wrote this about a year ago, before I had 50,000 words built up in some other story that I myself am writing. Feel free to grimace and mock me for my spelling, grammar, and maybe even ideas. But I hope that those at least are semi sound.


After finishing the Grapes of Wrath i am left with a feeling of John steinbeck just kinda being done with the book.
The whole book is masterfully laid out, with the characters all believably developed, and yet, he ends it with a weird scene of Rosasharn letting an old fifty year old man drink the milk of her dead baby, in a barn, in the hay. Nothing is really resolved. Tom has to run away, Al stays with the Weinwraths to marry Aggie, Casy is killed, and Connie has already run off. The family is falling apart, something that Ma has been dead set against the whole book. The other characters may have developed into tougher people bet they all have the same problems. Uncle John is still worried about sinning, he still feels that even his thoughts are too sinful for him to remain in the company of other humans. Pa is still worried about getting a job, he still worries that the control of the family is now Ma's. Ruthie and Winfield are still just kids, confused about what is going on but still able to be cordial to each other, for the most part. Ruthie gets meaner as she becomes more and more aware of the families problems, but she still is too young to have serious worries, that she can express. Tom, though he is now on the run to for killing a man, still worries about what is right. He thinks he is pretty close, he wants to start a union, and try to help people, but he still is mre of an impulisive character. His emotions lead his actions and when he tries to restrain himself it is very hard for him. Al is still into girls, though he does find Aggie, she is still his main focus, Aggie and the truck are his chief concern.
The only character with new worries is Rosasharn. Her husband has run off, something she has now come to terms with, her baby was born, it was dead, but it is no longer weighing her down. She is the one who is basically going to become a new character have a new role if the book continued, and she is the one that ends the book, the one who does the weird, uncomfortable, akward thing of letting a much older man suck the milk out of her breast. After thinking it over, i think that Steinbeck is actually saying that Rosasharn is now much more important, is a better person, has more will to survive and make other people survive than anyone else in the book. And as the Joad's story continues, undocumented she will play a large part in keeping the family alive. Ma and her will become almost equals. They will both have gone through personal hardships that have made them stronger. Ma's is seeing her family breaking up, falling apart, and Rosasharn's is having her husband run off, and giving birth to a dead baby. Plus they share the hardships of being Okies on the road in the middle of the Great Depression.

So ya, thats what i think of the Grapes of Wrath. Sorry if a lot of the capitol letters aren't capitol, my shift keys are kinda flipping out. Don't feel like cooperating anymore. Now I actually have to go do homework, but if anybody does read this, then i hope you think i am really smart and insightful after reading that Joad bit. I just want you to know that, i made that all up and you probably shouldn't quote me.....I am only a sophmore in highschool afterall. And you may have noticed that I don't really know how to make sentances, I am just faking it.

1984, George Orwell

 (Spoiler, don't read if you haven't read the book.)

I read this book a while ago but it is the book that gave me this whole idea so I might as well start with it. I apologize if I get plot points wrong, or mess up on a character's name. I actually don't really remember how the book begins, but I will do my best.
When the book first begins, I remember now, Winston Smith, the protagonist, is just coming home from a day of work. He mentions things that will be prevalent throughout the whole book. Orwell writes Winston's thoughts in a matter of fact way. It isn't necessarily bad that the elevator is broken, there is an image of Big Brother on the wall that seems to be always watching you, or that you actually are always watched by the telescreen, it is just how it is. Winston stands with his back to the telecsreen so that he is allowed to think. I  could consider this a symbolic hint at what the rest of the book is going to be like. Winston, until he is captured, often turns his back to authority and then seems to work twice as hard to appear to be a diehard Big Brother supporter.
I think that Orwell must have been a very suspicious guy in real life because he has the rebels lead by Big Brother and the Party. He must have, somewhere in his heart, never completely trusted anybody. The message that is clear throughout the book is everyone is breakable, no one is a good person, and the people you think you can trust are actually working against you.
Two of the people that Winston comes to trust implicitly end up betraying him. One is the owner of the little shop where Winston buys the paperweight, the journal, and eventually uses as a place to see his lover, Julia. The owner though he is dressed as a prole, is actually a member of the Thought Police. The other is O'Brien. O'Brien is a member of the inner party who convinces Winston and then though Winston, Julia, that he is a member of the rebels, seeking to overthrow Big Brother and the whole party system. He even goes as far as to write a book of all the flaws and ways the current party works. Once Winston and Julia are completely immersed in illegal activity O'Brien has the Thought Police arrest them. The rest of the book is difficult to read because it is all about torture, physical and mental.
The torture is so acute that eventually Winston is convinced that two plus two is five. To add to that O'Brien does the torturing and Winston thinks of O'Brien as a friend no matter how many unspeakable things O'Brien does to him.
This strange trust that Winston has in O'Brien makes the reader wonder whether O'Brien is even a supporter of Big Brother at all. O'Brien is head of the Thought Police so he would never be caught, it is a possibility to mull over. I have for quite sometime, I don't run out of things to think about or re-think about in the matter because there is no conclusive evidence in the text for either side.
When Winston is finally released he is just a shell. His mind has been worn down from the stress to think whatever it is that he is told to think. The only thing that lets the reader know that he is still a tiny bit Winston is that he will remind himself that two plus two is five, and when he finally realizes he loves Big Brother, he is happy because he gets to die.
The book starts out dark but matter of fact. It isn't till the end of the book when the reader has had the depressing thought provoking situation bored into their head that they really realize how bad it has been all along.
In one scene toward the beginning of the book Winston is walking  down the street where a bomb is set to explode. He ducks for cover because that it what the proles are doing and the proles have good intuition. When he gets up and continues on his way there is a body part in the street from a prole that didn't move fast enough. He just kicks it aside with his foot, no biggy. I just kept reading till that processed then went back and read it again. Winston's train of thought didn't even wander as he kicked the hand, or whatever it was, out of the way. So neither does the reader's.
At the end of the book when you close it and look up, pulling yourself out of the world, you are plunged back in with -- Wait a minute, it didn't just get worse at the end, it was that bad from the beginning. How was I able to sit through this whole book?
I think that George Orwell did a very good job with the whole thing. It is a different take on the human condition. It doesn't voice and opinion on whether humans are inherently good or bad, it just shows how he thinks humans would cope if there was nothing good at all. If they never knew anything good, what he thinks would happen. As 1984 is the only book I have read with such a theme I am inclined to believe what Orwell thought, that humans would think as told, do as told, and rethink as told. Their job isn't to support themselves, or have interesting ideas. For them to survive they are to be something that is nothing.