Hamlet Blogging

Sex and Violence Prompt

When Hamlet Senior is killed Gertrude is forced into an uncomfortable and painful situation. I can't imagine what it would feel like to lose a husband or anyone close to you. Claudius came to her rescue and supported her through her loss, but maybe he wasn't after her love, he was after her power. Either way, i think Gertrude's love for him was there, yet it was fake. It's almost disgusting how quickly she moved on to a second marriage. Regardless, I think that they both just used eachother. Gertrude used Claudius for stability and her used her for authority and power. He wanted the crown. I believe in a way Gertrude knew that about Claudius, but it didn't bother her because she just wanted to keep the power under her control. It was her duty to keep up authority and traditions. Ophelia on the other hand was treated so much like a child. Her father rarely allowed her to make any decisions. Her family is always monitoring her and watching over her to make sure that nothing is going on with Hamlet. Although she is monitered and discriminated by most men, i don't think thats the reason she went mad. I believe that she went mad because her life just started falling apart. Her father was killed by her own lover, if anything that's enough to make you go insane. I think she just lost it. Lastly, i do believe Hamlet was a misogynist. How could he not be? His mother betrayed him and his father. He wanted the crown and she gave it to his uncle, who she was so quick to marry after Hamlet;s fathers death. That had to be damaging. I think Hamlet realized that these women could be damaging and that was a threat to him. He disrespects them in order to protect himself.

Chancee's Hamlet Post

Gertrude is a mother of a country and she doesn't want to be alone. So after King Hamlet dies and his brother Claudius comforts her, she sees him as her rock. It is not necessarily love, but it is a connection that it built from a common family member. Ophelia loves Hamlet because of who he is politically and not because of who he actually is. Although the book does not write about their previous love, it just states that they do love each other, it never specifies that they ever hung out or had the opportunity to fall in love with each other. However, she does love him, just not for the reason that love usually exists now. She is mistreated by everyone, but she lets it happen so it ends up being her fault. "1st time, your fault, second time, my fault." She gets pushed around by both the King and her father when they tell her to give presents from Hamlet back to him. She knows that this is going to make Hamlet upset, but she still follows through with it because of those two men. Also, Hamlet himself mistreats her because of how he uses her to talk to during the play. He keeps saying rude and vulgar comments to get through to the King without thinking about her shame. Hamlet has a disdain for women because of his mother. She marries her dead husband's brother only two months after his death. Hamlet therefore starts to have no respect for women because if his mother, the epitome of women, marries so quickly, every other girl will do the same. Both Hamlet's mother and Ophelia get pushed around but do nothing about it. Shakespeare is misogynist because of the way he portrays woman. However, that was simply how women were when Hamlet was written. To speak unless spoken to. Women were supposed to go by what their husband said and never question his decisions.

Shannon's Hamlet Post

There are many different ways that some one can die. There are the accidents liek getting hit by a bus, there are murders that, unfortuantly, these days are horribly curel. There is suicide when people decide that they just cant live any more. There are the deaths that we see comming and cant do anything about except live the life we have left. No matter what way some one dies, our society sees it as a neggative. Because no matter what some one is leaving and never to come back. Along with all that the loved ones who care for them will never see a loved one ever again. No one on this living earth knows whats beyond life, weather its the so called "heaven and hell" or if we roam the planet as gohsts or what ever after life theory that seems possible. Its unknown and its terrifying becasue its so unknown. Some people may be curious about it or eager to see how one may end up. But in the end im sure that the fact of not knowing anything about death is what makes it a neggative. Im not going to say that we should look at it as a "new beginning" or "its jsut that time" I hate death. Im not the person to lose people to death and recover from that easy. There are many ways however that people see it. I think that Shakespeare sees it as THE END. Almost all of his plays ends with some one in the end dying. This could be perfectly acceptable, in the sense that he is writing life stories so the only way to end a life story is to end the life. Death i think is one of those things that every one could have a certain opinion on it, untill it happens to some one close to you or to you. Death is one of the very little things that every living htink on this planet have in common. We all live, We all die. The way we die however is different in every way. Its a weird thing to think about death, people who seem interested in it are labeled as fucked up. people who refuse to talk about it are labled as scared. People who dont have and an opinion are labled as the sort who doesnt value life enough to think about death. The unknown factor of death is what makes it such a interesting topic and subject to deal with.

Alison's Hamlet Post

Sex and Violence

When I read this play I thought wow Gertrude and Ophelia really do not get treated like they should be. These two women were both abused by Hamlet. In the book Hamlet went crazy and yelled and hit both Ophelia and his mother Gertrude. Ophelia and Gertrude were both offended by Hamlet; because Hamlet accused Gertrude of having his father killed. Even though he should not be accusing her for anything because she did nothing wrong. I feel as if Gertrude married this guy because maybe she was threatened by him, or either she just was greedy and wanted to stay Queen. In my opinion I personally think that there is a little love between these too much not much. Ophelia on the other hand in my opinion is miss treated. Hamlet yells at her and throws her against walls.

Dull for the Hype

Shakespeare’s play, Hamlet, was not an interesting work to say the least. All and all, I did not enjoy it. I think much of my dislike for the play comes from my not liking the extremely fine line drawn between the drama and comedy. Although serious stories do need their moments of comic relief, I feel like Shakespeare pushed that line too much, and tried to get his audience to laugh at things that really are not funny at all. Most of the time, I actually felt slightly angered by the things he was trying to get his reader to laugh about. It took away greatly from the story as it made these serious situations almost stupid. The entire work seemed like some kind of joke as Shakespeare couldn’t manage to keep a “straight face” for any of it.

Although many of the instances where comic relief is used failed, the one time I did enjoy it was with the gravediggers. I suppose much of my delight from this section had to do with the fact that the more educated gravedigger seemed to almost be making fun of the story of the royals. As Shakespeare made me see the Danish royalty as a bit of a joke, not to be taken seriously even in their darkest moments, when the gravedigger speaks so rudely to Hamlet, it seemed to be the only relief from the court. The entire court, from Claudius to Hamlet actually reminded me a bit of girls in high school who invest ridiculous amounts of energy into hating people who have wronged them as well as a few stupid situations that are not a big deal to begin with, but get inflated by the energy put into them. It seems for much of Hamlet it is all spoken drama without much resolution, for better or worse. The short encounter with the gravedigger was almost like he was slapping Hamlet in the face and getting the reader out of the drama filled court and back to reality. All the things that were so important for the entire play were suddenly no matter, a wonderful vacation as all the important issues surging through the play are hardly ever resolved.

In the end, I guess this is all really coming back to Hamlet’s inability to act. The play is all talk and no movement for so long, I became bored. And it is not just Hamlet who refuses to act. Very little is done by any other character besides Laraties, and even this enraged character is not given the chance to do anything until the end. Of course much rash action occurs within the last act, but, really? Was it necessary to have the other 200 pages? Hardly anything happens throughout the play though many of the characters make their world seem like such an important and exciting situation, when, in reality, nothing happens! It is true that a murder has taken place, and there is meant to be a long period of proving and figuring out the mystery, but not only is this section dull: a resolution takes far too long to be found for the amount of time spent tediously searching for it.

Simply stated, I was unimpressed by the other themes surrounding Hamlet, because my boredom stopped me from paying attention much to how exciting it could have been. If Shakespeare had presented the story in a slightly different fashion, adding at least some action from characters like Hamlet, I feel I would have enjoyed the play much more, but unfortunately this is not the case.

Shakespeares time killer

It is infuriating to the utmost that despite all of the anger which hamlet is feeling throughout the play, he fends off the action of revenge for far too long. Even when hamlet realizes that he is procrastinating he refuses to react. From the standpoint of making a wonderful play this is a good strategy in which Shakespeare adds length to his tragedy whilst keeping the suspense level up. I do not believe that hamlets lack of action had anything to do with cowardice, his father was just murdered. That alone should be enough to fuel his actions. I also do not think that Hamlet is simply over thinking things, but rather is simply killing time. If it is thinking and reasoning that makes us human then Hamlet is just "more human" than the rest of the characters, either that or he is, just by nature, an indecisive person. In the end i think it boils down to the fact that Shakespeare simply needed some situation that would give length to his play, and this was the easiest fit.

Maddness....THIS IS MY BLOG

It is abundantly clear that hamlet feigns his maddness in the play hamlet, yet some peoplew believe hamlet is truely had, but i say he is only mad for revenge. To have ur father murder by his own brother is bad enough but then to have that brother take up bed where his other brother now left, to have ur very own mother spread legs to her husbands murder, is far more than enough to drive on to maddness. but i only think hamlet is mad for revenge which i feel any human would be after experiencing such a situtation. Hamlet cares about nothing but his own revenge and some may say this is maddness but i say it is only being driven towards a goal. The ability to sacrafice all for one goal is not maddness but the most perfect example of sanity.

By god you're mad!

The madness in Shakespeare's work Hamlet is very apparent considering Hamlet says he is going mad, atleast feigning it. His madness may seem incredibly real in the first 4 acts, but when he returns from England, it seems that he has chilled out. It was as if he finally realized that he needs to kill Claudius instead of just going crazy thinking about it. His "antic disposition" is portrayed very well due to Hamlet actually going mad over the whole ordeal. Like I said, he comes back and seems to have gotten over it and is determined to finish his goals. Ophelia's madness, on the other hand, is legitimate. Because Hamlet goes mad and gets sent away from his lover, she goes insane too. Constantly, she is freaking out and acting weird towards everyone, clearly portraying that she is actually mad. Her taking of her life is the strongest evidence reinforcing her madness. This also provides evidence towards Hamlet's fake madness because he did not feel at all like Ophelia. He had no desire to take his life. Through good acting, Hamlet was able to convince the people around him that he was mad, and Ophelia actually was mad and killed herself. The End.

Hamlet stuff

The novel Hamlet by William Shakespear family relationships play a vital roll. Each character seems to have a foil that is represented by someone from another family. Hamlet to Laertes, Hamlet to Fortinbras, Polarius to Claudius. By having a foil, Shakespear created someone that each character could be compared to. Each character, son, wife, husband and so on are blurred together maybe to show certain issues that each character has. Hamlet seems to over think just about every dission he makes. He almost slays Claudius but dicides not to because he's praying and he wouldn't go to hell if he died in prayer. He then doesn't think and stabs Polonius because he thought he was someone else. On the other hand, Fortinbras is a man of action. He takes over Poland and then starts to take over Demark. He uses action instead of thinking over the situation. Laertes is a man of action as well. After Ophelia drowns, he rushes into the castle and threatens Claudius with a sword! However, he then listens to Claudius and realizes it wasn't his fault. Hamlet wouldn't even pick up a sword and rush to avenge his father's death. Hamlet's relation with his father is not explained well in the novel. He is depressed for months after his fathers death and thinks about it constantly, unlike Laertes.

DEATH

At the beginning of this play I didn't really know what to think. When we were told that everyone ends up dieing wondered if there was someone who killed everyone. Or if there was a disease that wiped everyone out. I really had no idea. I really liked how we watched the movie along with reading the book because Shakespeare's plays are written in a way that is very hard to read. The movie made it much more clear to understand. The movie was fun to watch. One scene that really stuck out to me was the one about Hamlet's ghost. Not only because it was like Hamlet and his ghost were in a different world. Hamlet's ghost was so creepy and crazy. That was one of the "death" scenes that I remember really well. Also when Hamlet stabbed his father wrapped up in a curtain. I thought that this was very weird. Not only did he not know who was in the curtain but to just randomly stab someone. I would never be able to do that. I think that Hamlet was insane in the membrane. For Shakespeare to write about such crazy people and about people dieing he must think about death and have a lot of thoughts going through his head.I think that death is definitely is one of the main focuses of this play.

Hamlet Post...

In this novel, Hamlet by William Shakespear, the madness experienced by Hamlet is completely faulty compared to the actual madness that Ophelia goes through because of the death of her father. Where Hamlet's madness is faked to create a disposition that can be unread by those who he plans on attacking, Ophelia's madness is actually experienced through the death of a family member. Hamlet goes "crazy" because it is neccessary for him to act differentlly so he gets the traitorous king and everyone else off his back. Ophelia on the other hand goes through a period of actually madness because of the loss of her father. Ophelia doesn't know how to express her emotions so she secludes herself from everyone, Hamlet on the other hand knows exactly what he needs to do to control his emotions in a way that misleads thoughs who might suspect him for trickery. It is ironic that the two lovers, Hamlet and Ophelia, both under go a situation of madness in this novel and then are connected through this madness in the end because of their deaths. Madness is viewed in Shakespear's eyes as two completely different things throughout this novel. It was neccessary for him to display this madness in both situations to emphasize the pain that both Hamlet and Ophelia experience on a different level. The comparing and contrasting between these two different examples of madness, display Shakespear's development of both of these unique characters.

Madness i tell you!

Hamlet is a little nuts to begin with... His dad dieing really didnt help. However, when he did see the ghost of his father, i do not think that it either drove him mad or that he just started to pretend to be mad. Honestly, if you or i saw the ghost of our father, how much longer do you think that we would appear normal to anyone else? He has SO much stuff going through his head, his thoughts are racing in such multitude that indeed, he appears insane. Coupled with grief, and a burning desire for revenge, his wits may have left him. In any case, you must draw the line of when you consider someone to be truly MAD; not just sad, mad, or in grieving. Or is there even a line to be drawn? Surely fair ophelia was not mad before her father died, and even afterwards i think that she was in deep depression, but not mentally ill. Her stunt with the invisible flowers was probably a concious one. Not some figment of her imagination. So, honestly i think neither of them were nuts.

Madness in Hamlet

Madness is a grand theme in the play Hamlet by William Shakespeare. After he sees his fathers ghost, Hamlet decides to feign madness so he can disguise his motive for avenging his father's death. He starts to fake his madness shortly after his run in with his father's ghost, this is very apparent in his talks with Pollonius. Hamlet continues to fake madness for a good amount of time, until the rage he feels actually starts to make him crazy, as is shown when he blindly kills polonius on accident thinking it is the king. The further the play goes on, the more real madness becomes apparent in hamlet's character as well as central theme in the play. Ophelia is another character who becomes crazy as the play goes on, she is driven crazy by the madness of hamlet, which is made far worse by the death of her father, as she eventually ends up killing herself. Ophelia's madness is far more genuine than Hamlet's overall, but the madness in both of them, provoked by tragedy, causes them both to act extremely irrationally and makes the play take a huge twist in plot.

Ophelia

Ophelia, in my opinion is one of the most interesting and deep characters in the play, that REALLY got screwed over. As the play progresses, you come to find that Ophelia loves Hamlet, (and towards the end it is confirmed that Hamlet loved her back) but her father and the King convince her to fool Hamlet into becoming mad. Between trying to please her father and Hamlet at once, she is forced in between a rock and a hard place. After her father and the king convince her Hamlet is mad, Hamlet murders her father. From here, she spirals into a madness, that is unreversable, and ends up killing her. Ophelia really loved Hamlet, but drove him, and herself crazy by obeying to her fathers orders, of spying and sneaking.

The scene of her brother Laertes returning to the castle after the murder of his father. was hard to understand in the reading, but once it was thrown into the context of the movie, it was a really moving scene. Laertes sees for the first time that his sister is mad, and this, along with the death of his father causes him to become outraged, and in the end, a little mad. But right before his death, he apologizes to Hamlet.

One of the most significant scenes is the grave digger scene, where Hamlet and Horactio meet the King Queen and Laertes burying Ophelia's body in the woods. Here is where Hamlet's madness is evidently not hiden or pretend, but his true love for Ophelia, expressed in madness is exposed.

Hamlet

Relationships, and their following intricacies, will always remain timeless. Though candle light may have developed into electricity, the lightbulb, and now the series of electronics all with the prefix "i". No matter what century, human relationships will always re-encounter the same conflicts. Most of us can't closely relate to the story of Hamlet, we aren't royalty (i don't think), the majority have never even set foot in Denmark....I know I haven't. We can however, understand the relationship conflicts of the characters in the play.

Upon the death of his father Hamlet's uncle imminently, and eagerly for that matter, marries his mother (Gertrude) This act of incest largely colors Hamlet's relationships in the play. Hamlet becomes practically obsessed with the relationship between Gertrude and Claudius. I think, for Gertrude, marrying Claudius was an easy out. It wasn't a societal norm, even in this time period incest wasn't considered normal. It wasn't her civic duty either; it was an action done so she could remain in her own comfort zone.

Not only this, but Hamlet becomes very cynical towards women in general. With Ophelia, there is always that constant struggle for control. Ophelia becomes both intrigued, and utterly confused by his erratic mind games. Hamlet becomes a misogynist; he has a very blatant hatred of women. We see his emerging opinion of female sexuality, the very sin, and how it leads to moral corruption. For instance when Hamlet remarks to Ophelia "get thee to a nunnery." He is suggesting to Ophelia that she "save her soul" before it is too late.

Would I have taken on the same roles if I were Gertrude or Hamlet? One can never know, but I can definitely understand their actions.

"Middleness"

Middle Passage by Charles Johnson is not just the title of the novel, but an indicator of the theme. The whole book relies on the idea of the "middle". The concept middle is mainly regarding Rutherford. He is placed in the middle of the two sides on the ship, including Captain Falcon, and the rest of the crew. He plays his cards wisely in order to contribute to both sides, almost like a double agent. He sides with the Allmuseri and their plan to take over Captain Falcon, but shortly after he warns Falcon about their attack. Captain Falcon laughs it off and mentions how no one could ever kill him, he couldn't even kill himself. He awards Calhoun for sharing this information with him, and begins to trust him. It's interesting to see how he can benefit himself from both sides. Another relation to the "middle" theme, is that a major climax occurs in the exact middle of the novel, correlating to the book title. Captain Falcon has captured an African God and stowed him secretly in his mysterious cargo. Yet again the suspense kicks in when he shares his secret with Rutherford, who claims he will keep the information to himself. Will he remain trustworthy or spoil the news to the rest of the crew? Finally, a more ironic explanation of the middle theme, is Rutherford's adventure on a slaver while he is truly a free man. It's interesting to see if he will fall back into the trap of slavery, or become someone who supports it. These twists of opinions and plot events are interesting to me. I am excited to find out where Rutherford ends up, and if he remains alive or not.

middle man

In the novel the Middle Passage the main character Rutherford Calhoun seems to be constantantly the middle man of many issues. In fact as i have been reading the book i believed that maybe the books title was not only based upon the fact that they are on the slave route the middle passage but also because Rutherfords almost middle man status. On the ship the crew is constantly trying to find a way to get rid of their captain Falcon. They want Rutherford to go into the captains quarters and set it up so that someone can sneak in, because he found a way to get in. however throughout the novel Rutherford has formed an interesting almost bond friendship with the captain, often having deep conversations with Falcon about his life. He is instantly the middle man and doesnt really know which side to take in this situation. Rutherford is also in the middle when it comes with his relationship with the slaves. Being that he is the only one of the crew that even slightly resembles the slaves. So he ends up forming bonds with some of the slaves and even gaining a little girl named Beleka who is attached to his hip. They also tell him to go to their part of the ship one night and to bring anyone whome he wants to save.

This is a cool book

Even since the beginning of the novel, I have been enjoying it. The story behind Rutherford is really interesting and pretty cool, too. Because he is a thief, it gives him certain traits that allow him to do things that you would not expect and do them well. The scene where Rutherford is snooping around Falcon's quarters on the ship is one that I particularly enjoyed to read. The things Falcon has lying around are intriguing to me.
Rutherford's middle placement within the story also gives you a point of view from every group. You get to learn what Falcon, the crew, and he himself is thinking. They are all different. The dramatic irony that Rutherford brings about is fun because you know exactly what he knows too. And he knows everything about what is going to happen. He is in the middle and this placement gives the reader info on all events that occur in the story.

Middle Passage first blog and such

So far I've really enjoyed reading middle passage. It's a fun book with enough action to keep it interesting but also with enough metaphorical literature-ness that it leads to good, thought provoking class discussions.

The theme of being in the "middle" is really intriguing to me due to the way in which it is explored in every character or object. The idea of dualism vs unity is one I would like to explore a lot more. The characters I have been able to place somewhere along the Unity------>Dualism spectrum are...
Rutherford (who's in the middle)
Falcon (Dualism)
The Republic (Dualism-maybe? well it's all about being a process)
The Allmuseri+The God (VERY much Unity)
Isadora (Unity-well maybe she's a little tricky too)
White people in general (Dualism)

But I want to know more about the representation of

1) Jackson....this character still really confuses me. I'm excited to discuss and understand more about him and why he did what he did. (That was so crazy on his part! Maybe it was the right thing to do, but if I were Rutherford I would be pissed off too)
2) Does Tommy O'Toole represent one?
3) Or what about Cringle?
4) Ngonyama? (he SHOULD represent unity but then he is kind of the contradiction to the rule)

So I'm really excited to hear what happens next and also to see which side Rutherford ends up on when the mutiny occurs. Will he stay loyal to the crew or follow Falcon? Right now I have no idea.

January 21 2010

"The Middle Passage" is a representation of Rutherford's relationship with the various crews on the Republic. Not only is he a member of the crew, When the crew agrees on a mutainy, and he cuts his finger and drinks wine, but Calhoun asked Rutherfod to keep an eye and ear on the crew, and report back to him. When Rutherford asks, "A spy?", Falcon responds with "Nay, a friend! I need someone to keep this eyes open and tell me of any signs of trouble." And he becames friends with Ngonyama, one of the leaders of the groups of the Allmuseri. They form a relationship where they teach eachother their languages, most likley because he is the only African American member of the crew of the Republic. Rutherford ends up giving Ngonyama and the membders of the Allmuserithe key to the cell to break them free. So this causes Rutherford to become surrounded by a member of every perspective on the ship. This causes him to become the center of the ship, and substantial member of each group of people.

His relationsip with the captian is the most interesting to read because you see everything from the highest state of power on the ship.

The Middle...

This book has a great deal with the middle of things. Not only is the Republic in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean and following the famous middle passage, the slave trade route. The theme of the middle is found everywhere in the book, especially regarding Rutherford. One reason why Rutherford is in the middle is because he is on everyone's side, an example of this is how he claims that he is on the side of the mutineers as well as that of Captain Falcon. When the muteers plan their mutiny, Rutherford claims to be in on it, but he soon tells the falcon what is going to happen. This shows how Rutherford is in the middle because he is on no one's side. Rutherford is also in the middle because he is a free black on a slave ship. This means that he cannot fully identify with the crew or the slaves. This, also shows how Rutherford is very much in the middle.

Middle Passage....egassaP elddiM

Im standing here, on the poop deck, watching Rutherford cower behind the mast whilst Meadows beats the dogs, clad in Rutherford's clothing. Comeon man.... do something.... dont just watch that happen. But he doesnt, and as the reader, i might as well be a silent pacified bystander, it troubles me to see this. Only hours from now, Rutherford will cover himself with rotting flesh from throwing a dead Allmuseri overboard, but he does not know it. Only hours from now, Rutherford will become Nduga, but he does not know that either. If he did know of what was to come, would he change his plan now, i dont know. And not knowing, this also troubles me. This trend continues though, each page i read i feel that the last might have been written differently had they also seen this dramatic irony. For this, i curse this book, for this, i cannot drop it. I am now a part of this novel, if i were to stop reading i would be forever lost in the same still waters that keeps the crew of the Republic from their homes. I, as much as Cringle and Rutherford, as much as the Allmuseri, would love to finish this adventure.

Middle of the Middle

So far I find this book very enjoyable and what most appeals to me is the fact that when looked at from the outside it is a seemingly very simple novel while when you dive further into it there is much complexity and depth to be extracted from it. The concept of being in the middle is on that is very prevalent in this novel and in the character of Rutherford. The fact that he is a Black man puts him on the bottom but the fact that he is freeman elevates him slightly. He is literally stuck in the middle of everything. Whites look down on him because he is of the “inferior” race and the same is true of other Black slaves, he is above them and therefore he is not one of them either. This is a theme that I very much enjoy because it seems that many of us feel as if we are in the middle of something. Whether it be in the middle of a conflict, in the middle in terms of rank, or like Rutherford, stuck between races. It is fairly easy to feel disconnected from everyone and feel like there is no one who understands your unique situation. Every side feels as if it’s pulling and /or pushing you, you may feel pressure to pick a side, pick a team to support or maybe no one wants you because you are different and are therefore receiving judgment and criticism from both sides. Often times there is much bouncing back and forth, picking sides, changing sides, and ultimately being left nowhere. I have been in the middle of many conflicts and it is the worst position to be in because there are no clear answers on what to do or who to support. Being in the middle represents not being in the middle at all, not being at the center of everyone’s attention, and being in the middle feels like being the biggest outcast possible. There is this dualism that is present because of the fact that no matter what you will be fighting with yourself or others because no matter what you are not with people of your kind, you will always be different. It is very difficult to express the difference between being in the middle and being centered, because while the two words seem interchangeable, I see them as extremely opposing ideals. Being centered very simply put is being balanced. There is unity, you are not working for or against someone or something you are one and amidst everything, balancing and experiencing it all simultaneously.

(Sorry if theres errors, didnt rly have time to look over)

"The God"

Ebenezer Falcon is returning from Africa with not only riches in slaves but something greater....something irreplaceable, somthing incomprehensible.Falcon has obtained an Allumseri god. Falcon lives to capture any and everything, whether it be land, riches, or souls. The thought that he has literally captured God (no pun intended) is immensely self fulfilling to him, and kind of ironic to us.

I think the god is intriguing, especially in the scene where Tommy O'Toole goes to investigate it. Somehow Tommy returns speaking multiple native african languages. Overall, we can say Tommy seems practically posessed. Interesting......

It's a figure of immense mystery..... In terms of narrative advantage Johnson could push the story any way he wants. I think that by having an Allumseri god on board we will (both metaphorically and literally) see how much power this tribe holds. That even though they are regarded as the inferior race, they are much superior. I predict that the black slaves will ultimately be revealed to be more strong than whites once thought of them as. The "God" will help them achieve this.....i have yet to know how. I do however hope that the story doesn't get to science fiction esque, just because i think it would detract from the overall message, strength of the story, and I am not a big fan of science fiction :)

middle passage

'tis a god!' What!! now I'm confused! i was liking where this book was heading with the middle passage metaphors and semi-realistic ship travels, the characters it was all adding up, but now i am confused, what does he mean a god, is it some kind of undeveloped human or super developed human, or is he just spiralling off and leaving all sort of reality behind and having some superficial 'GOD' being on board. this raises a lot of questions as all religion does questions like, how did they catch this god? why doesn't this god destroy them? Why don't they worship the god? how did they capture this god? do they still worship Christ? what is it??? what will they do with it? a crate, really? is it a hungry god if so them wouldn't it be human by needing to consume? where did this god come? from are there more?

MIddle Passage... The Beggining of the End

I have taken a real interest in this book. The main issue that comes up in my head while im reading htis is how the Hell does Charles Johnson come up with the things in this book.. such as the Almusari, how they think, their identiy.. like the lack of finger prints???? I wish i was as clever as he was. The idea of capturing a God? like where the hell is he getting all this? Its fantasitc I eat that shit up! I like the character Falcon, he is one of the most interesting people ive ever read about, not only how he is protrayed in the book but how he talks and how other react with him in the novel. the ideas he thinks of are amazing and a beautiful way to think about society. I completly agree with his thoughts on the winning opinion is the right one, because if the winning one kicks all the losing opinions out... who else is there? No one. I think the biggest concept of "middle" is Rutherford. He connects with Captain Falcon, who represents Unity then he also gets along wth Ngonyama, the Almusari leader who represtents Dualism. Rutherford is a common ground amongst all of the characters that we have meet so far, he is a median in every situation and he happened to stow away on The Republic which follows the Middle Passage, there is no way that he cant symbolize the greater meaning of "middle". Now the center is being connected to all things in an equal way, middle is more having some sort of relationship not necessarily equal to both sides. He has a relation with everything but he is not the middle and equally connected so there for he is the middle, but not the center. I think the symbolism of Center in this book would be The Republic. It is equally connected to every one on it, no more or less with one person. Now i haven't read past Entry the Third but i am very curious to see how the God is portrayed in the book, is it a good God that helps unify people? or is it an evil God that will raise hell and destruction and kill every one on the ship except the people with colored skin? maybe i don't know just predicting. I like the way this book is written, i love the language and the references in the book and how unique every character is from one another. there is no same character attributes at all. they are all sooo very different like maybe not polar opposite but different in essentially every way. I truly like this book its liken nothing ive ever read and i believe that it is the kind of book that every one can love even if people dont like this sort of genre i think it is possible for every person to enjoy. I cant wait to see what happens next.

MIddle Passage

Middle Passage by Charles Johnson is a very interesting book. I also like how Charles is black because we are so used to reading books around this time from a white person's perspective, and now we get to see how the blacks felt and were emotionally effected by all this happening to them, from being sold and moved around to being maybe even a free man then being written up as a run away slave. There are just so many suspenseful moments when i just have to keep reading ahead even if we are supposed to stop. I also love many of the characters in this book. This book is just wonderful all around and has many interesting scenes that i get all into.
First of all, my favorite character is Rutherford Calhoun. The interesting thing about him is that he is a freed slave and he still lives down South in New Orleans. I also liked how he wanted to travel the world instead of get married, he wanted to test things out and not be tied down. It was also weird in the begging of the book when we hear about that gang with the leader called Papa. I never knew that there were little gangs like that. Another character i loved was Captain Falcon. He as a man is strange because he is usually always drunk and ordering Rutherford around. But then in a way he connects with Rutherford and helps him out by giving him that magnetic ring and the gun to go with it.
My favorite part about this book so far has been when Rutherford found out that there is a God on board the Republic. When he found out i feel like he was scared, like he had no clue on what to do with this god and how to chain him down. This God was very interesting to read about because he has so many powers. He comes from the tribe Allmuseri, which is known for hard workers. My favorite line in this section was "You may say empirical knowledge is on man's side, not God's. It's our glory and grief both, function of the duality mind..." This line is so inter sting how it is almost even saying that man is more intelligent, more powerful than God its self. This god reflects the values of the Allumseri because it almost even represents their culture, which is again hard working men, but then this god traps people and tricks them into going to heaven. The god on board may cause some advantages or disadvantages. It could kill many people on tricking them or it could save slaves by relieving them. It could go either way.

Middle Passage

So far I think that this book is really interesting. I find myself left wondering about many thing. I wish there was a way we could hear about how Isadora, and what what she is doing with her life. I also think is it strange that Rutherford is a freed slave on a slave boat, but at the same time it was the only way he could really save himself. I want to if he ever thinks about Isadora, and what goes through his mind. I thought it was interesting how on page 61 it was talking about the slaves and how "their palms were blank, bearing no lines. No fingerprints." This made me think about how slaves are not treated like individuals at all and how that's really sad because they can not have any say in what happens to them or what tasks they have to perform. This quote is proof of saying that slaves are just items and not people.
I can actually picture this book being a true story and can see it being a voyage that would be really interesting to be apart of. I think that it is cool how this book holds mysteries, it makes it more fun to read. This is my favorite book that we have read so far in A.P lit.
I am kind of confused about the God and how it is in the cage/ box. When I think of a God I think of them being all around and not just in one specific place. I want to know is going to happen to the God as the voyage progresses.

THE GOD

On page 100, you learn that the extra cargo that Falcon brought on the ship is the Almuseri's god. Falcon gloats that he not only is bringing the people, but their Deity. Once Rutherford grasps the idea of having a god on the very same ship he is on, he starts worrying of what will happen in the future when they land in America. I share the same worrying ideas that he has. "No explorer could touch Falcon now. He had won his deepest wish... History, as we knew it, would end, for there would be no barriers between the secular and sacred." (103) Falcon had the answers to everything now that he possesses "everything." He explains how the god is everything. Once they are in America, they will rape the god in every way is possible, they will take advantage of all that it has to offer and then prod it even more. Humans are going to fuck themselves over because this god is everything and when they mess with it, they will be messing with everything that is around them, themselves, ideas, places. EVERYTHING. AHHH
The Almuseri are the prodigy of unity. They are the Almuseri, they are not individuals. I love the thought of how these people are not people, but a people. I wish we could sense that feeling of unity of one in anything. Every aspect of life for us is competitive. We are born in a country where everyone has to be the best, everyone has to be an 'A' personality. If we worked together rather than one, as a nation we would be better than a myriad of productive individuals.
I have a few questions.
1. I really wonder what is problem between Jackson and Rutherford.
2. Falcon addresses how he captured a god, but how is that realistic. Why is the god materialized for several seconds?

So far this has been my favorite book that we have read in Lit. It has a more in depth plot and we don't find out many aspects of it for a while. I also like that Rutherford is the narrator because you get a sense of why he is a thief. If it was said from another perspective, we wouldn't know that he does it not only because he likes to, but also when he is nervous. It's almost a therapy for Rutherford. I am really excited to read more.

The middle passage Bloggage

Congratulations Mr. Lavender you are the first teacher, as far as I can remember, who has assigned a reading that is both interesting and engaging. Mostly I like reading science fiction books that have little or no relevance to life or what I’m doing in school. Those books are an ‘out’ of life (especially if life is boring). I feel that Middle Passage is borderline Sci-Fi, or at least up to where I have read. Putting a tribal god into a box was a cool idea because it might have been the last thing that I expected to find in a seemingly nonfiction book. These curve balls are what keep me interested. Another wonderfully thought out aspect of Middle Passage is how we can fully view each faction from the point of view of Rutherford. This gives an emphasis onto the dualism which this book revolves around. In all tis' a jolly good read!

Middle Passage

My impression on Middle Passage is impeded by my inability to grasp some analogies and deeper meanings. Like traveling down a highway too fast to be able to acknowledge the signs in their entirety, I read past something I don’t understand hoping to find meaning in the next few passages. Partially due to my inferior English 11 brain and my incapacity to pay attention for long periods of time, I cannot comprehend all aspects of this Novel. However, I am captivated by many of the specifics of this book, such as the characters, plot, and setting. It is a tangible, yet fictitious recollection of adventure intertwined with some of the most detrimental human qualities that mankind has faced. By embarking on this adventure, some of the worst mentalities of the human species are illuminated. A great example of this is Captain Falcon, eating blacks, raping children. He is the ultimate illustration of Nepolion Syndrome.

Middle Passage

Charles Johnson’s Middle Passage has been a very enjoyable novel for the most part so far. There are parts that truly shock and or disgust, but they do great things for the novel, and keep the reader craving more. For the most part though, I’d have to say I’ve enjoyed the writing style more than the actually story at this point.

Middle Passage is beautifully written. I really enjoy the way Johnson constructs his sentences as well as all the words he chooses. Every single part of the book seems to be handpicked, after a long process of thought and consideration. All the words flow so smoothly it is simply a pleasure to read them no matter what they say. Not to mention how spectacular the descriptions are. They not only give you a picture, put a precise mood, and feeling.

Also, many of the ideas brought up throughout the novel are great. I especially enjoyed the part where Rutherford is talking to Falcon in his cabin, and Falcon brings up the idea that to think, we must be separate. “Man is the problem, Mr. Calhoun. Not just gents, but women as well, anythin’ capable of thought,” (pg. 96) was such a pleasure to read because it brought up something so wonderful to think about. It is true that our thoughts set us all apart, but what of those with the same thoughts? Are we still separate if we think the same on one topic or another? Falcon’s idea may be wrong as it may actually be the topic of a conversation or debate rather than the thoughts involved that separate us all.

As for the story, I’m not so sure I entirely understand the point of certain parts and characters. I suppose that many of the characters will have important roles as the story progresses, but for now I’m really not entirely sure what to make of them. For example, Tommy O’Toole is a boy I can see has some functioning part in the book, but he seems so minor, I really don’t understand what the point of his presence is. I suppose it could be to expand on understanding Falcon as a person, but other than that I’m lost as to why he is there. This is the same with certain passages, which I’m sure are also there for a reason, even if it is only to keep the book moving, but much of the time I feel the need to skip over these parts or only read them because of how well I believe they are written. As Johnson’s words seem so carefully selected though, I’m sure that it is the same for many of these characters and parts. Johnson does not seem one who would put anything down without a reason.

The Alluseri god is something in Middle Passage I find myself very borderline about. I’m hoping that when they open the crate, the prized object will instead be an exotic animal, as for me the idea of having a god locked up seems too far fetched. Much of what I like about this book has to do with the fact that is was somewhat historically accurate, and though I see how making up an African tribe would help, I really don’t think a god does anything for the novel. All the god does at this point is make the story extremely unbelievable for me, and although I do like the fantasy genre, in a story like this it is simply over the line to have something like that. The idea of having a god in the crate reflects the Alluseri brilliantly though as it binds them to a sense of being untouchable or almost unearthly themselves.

All and all, Middle Passage is certainly my favorite novel we read as a class this year. It may have to do with my interest in the slave trade, but as so far I don’t feel Johnson has focused too much on that aspect, I suppose the novel as a whole has caught my interest.

middle passage

The concept of the word middle comes up throughout the book. Rutherford is the very meaning of a middle man. He cannot decide between being Falcons bitch or being the crews buddy. He is confused by everything that comes up in his life, whether its marriage, or paying his debt. Rutherford knows he loves Isadora but he cannot fully commit to one thing and marry her. Thus begins his journey on the boat, where he becomes even more of a middle man. When breaking into Falcons cabin, Rutherford gets caught, this is where he really becomes Falcons bitch. Falcon even goes so far as asking him to spy on the crew for him. Someone like Tommy O'Toole is centered, he is both inside the box with the god, and outside with the crew. He has overcome the decision to be one way or another that he is now both. For example when the god is singing the song Tommy is both singing the song and he is the song.

Middle Passage

So far Middle Passage by Charles Johnson is an enjoyable book that I have no problem picking up and reading through. The symbolism of being in the "middle" is constantly reoccurring throughout the novel. Although the plot and symbolism in this book are great, I feel the characters in this novel are flawed. The main characters such as Rutherford, Falcon and Cringle are well developed but I feel the other characters weren't as well throughout. All the minor characters have very similar backgrounds and don't have any real voice in the novel. Aside from that minor setback the novel is very interesting and has a fluid flow to it. The first half of the novel was good but I hope that the second half will be at a quicker pace. The literary techniques in the novel are easily apparent and easy to catch onto. The imagery is very vivid and does a great job of depicting scenes with words that really paint an image in the readers mind. It is also interesting how themes, characters and traits in the novel relate to each other. The connection between the individuality of the sea and the graping bonds of land.

Middle Passage Blog

The Allmuseri God, signifies unity to the tribe. It is the master of everything. The universe, the cosmos...it controls the outward expanding of the universe, it controls even the atoms. It keeps the cylce going and going. Forever uniting everything. It does this, as the Allmuseri preists say, with "only one-fourth of its full power." And uses the other three-fourths to sustain parallel universes. I think this is awesome, but the description of this God got a little foggy. It has a "thousand names" and they don't carve it's image. "All tings are its image: stone and sand. Master and salve." Falcon was I guess just lucky, that he was in the right place and the right time when the God apeared in its physical form.
Some advantages of having a symbol of unity, like this god, is that Falcon is stripping unity from the tribe....I'm running into a wall with this prompt. I guess a disadvantage would be that....what is falcon going to do with a god?...sell it?....tame it? Who knows?