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.