Tuesday, January 14, 2014
Thursday, December 5, 2013
Tuesday, November 19, 2013
#19: Reflection on The Rainbow Writing
The Rainbow Prompt Essay:
In DH Lawrence's 1915 novel, The Rainbow, personification, gothic and pastoral imagery, rhetorical questions and repetition in sentence structure all work to portray the life of the woman as held cpative in her world, back from the man, only left wondering why men have the world open freely to them despite their destructive forces.
In the first part of the excerpt Lawrence utilizes personification and pastoral and gothic imagery to show the contrast between the scenery and the speaker's feelings about the situation. "The earth heaved," is an example of the personification used; with such strong diction used and imagery seen in this first sentence it demonstrates how the world plays in favor of men because after the personification Lawrence writes, "and opened it furrow to them (men)" (1-2). So the earth is working for them and it would seem working very hard because the world "heaved" which usually implies the task is hard. This implies that the world is open to men so easily. The scene set in the first passage is of a rural are that is described with phrases like, "the wind blew dry the wet what, and set young ears of corn...So much warmth and generating and pain and death" (2-7). In these lines at first the image is pretty and nice (pastoral imagery) but then "death" and "pain" are mentioned and later "blood" and "beast" (gothic imagery). This stark contrast demonstrates, once again, how the world is helping men, even though it can cause great pain to it. In the context of the setting of this novel, late nineteenth century, women didn't have much freedom or rights but mend id and no one questions that men should have these rights. Then the passage goes on to say, "but women wanted another form of life...something that was not blood-intimacy" (15-16). Once again this dark imagery relating to blood, pain, injury is brought up, but this time it's to demonstrate the contrast between men and women and the lives they want and lead. Women don't want the pain and suffering described previously and for the world to take pain because of them, and it doesn't, because it isn't open freely to them; women don't have the same freedom as men.
Rhetorical questions also further the described contrast between men and women as the speaker questions why men are as they are. For example, "what was it...that raised him above the common men as man is raised above beast?" (55-56). In this question a parallel is drawn between men and beasts. The speaker is asking what about the "vicar" that raised her husband above the other men as beast are above men? With this being a question it makes the thought that men are above beasts seem unsure as the speaker is unsure how the lady's husband is above the other men and the two are paralleled in the question. This furthers the description of the destruction or pain that men can cause in the world because of the question and parallel of men to beast.
Repetition is throughout the passage in the structure of sentences such as the pattern of "dark and dry and small," "money nor power nor position," "sky and harvest and beast and land," (33-34). This repetition in structure emphasizes the bizarre way of men's nature (when the "nor"s are repeated) and the repetition of "and"s emphasizes how much men have opened to them despite what they have done to it. For example, in the line the "sky and harvest..." after that Lawrence writes "she strained her eyes to see what man had done in fighting outwards" (33-34). So man has all of the world open to him yet he damages it in his fight for more, more "knowledge," and access to the world around him.
Lawrence portrays man as destructive in nature because of the freedoms he has been given naturally, while the woman is left to see this and be held back from the world she is not so freely given access to despite her less destructive nature.
Reflection on Essay:
When I was typing this essay up I found many errors, lack of sophistication in writing style, and a plausible but not totally correct interpretation of the work. I looked at the excerpt as more a contrast between the position of women and men in society and how much of the world men have open to them (because of how many more rights they had than women in the time period) in comparison to the limited life that women had. That is the struggle I was portraying that the women was going through but in actuality the struggle was more the rural life she was living in but didn't want. The contrast between women and men relied more on the "outward" versus "inward" positioning than the other diction that I talked about that showed comparison. The woman was looking outward toward the future to the cities and that's what she wanted, not to be stuck in a rural life. But the struggle or "battle" described in the excerpt relied in how the woman was looking outward and wanting to go the city but she didn't know how to attain that goal. I think the key to reaching this understanding was focusing on the "outward" versus "inward" that contrasted the man and woman. Also, I saw the reference to blood and pain often and that is why I thought it had something to do with man's destructive forces but having the background knowledge about DH Lawrence helped a lot in understanding why there was that repetition. Lawrence was known for his Blood Knowledge Philosophy in which he was quoted saying, "My great religion is a belief in the blood, as the flesh being wiser than the intellect." In this he is saying one should follow their instinct or desires and in the excerpt it was the woman's desire to leave her rural life but it was a desire she didn't know how to fulfill. Having this knowledge of DH Lawrence's thought process and beliefs helps tremendously in determining in the meaning of a work. Through this essay I now truly understand the importance of researching the author so we can get this insight. For our presentations last trimester we had to research the author to find out how their background information impacted their writing styles and I knew this step was important but never how important until now.
For this essay when I started reading the excerpt and writing I felt lost and confused and I think this was because of how unfocused on was when I read the excerpt. I annotated the passage but I didn't reread the prompt after it was read aloud and fully realize that I was supposed to be focus mainly on the woman and in the beginning of the essay I feel I focused to much on the man. I think I let the time constraints and the surprise of the essay panic me. I just need to carefully read everything and stay focused for future prompts. I also didn't have much of a short outline of thoughts written down before I started my essay which might have been helpful in developing my thesis and the meaning I connected to each literary device better because I felt like I just came up with the devices and not how they added to the passage and than when I got to fleshing out my thoughts about each literary device I felt I was not fully understanding the effect of the device myself.
In DH Lawrence's 1915 novel, The Rainbow, personification, gothic and pastoral imagery, rhetorical questions and repetition in sentence structure all work to portray the life of the woman as held cpative in her world, back from the man, only left wondering why men have the world open freely to them despite their destructive forces.
In the first part of the excerpt Lawrence utilizes personification and pastoral and gothic imagery to show the contrast between the scenery and the speaker's feelings about the situation. "The earth heaved," is an example of the personification used; with such strong diction used and imagery seen in this first sentence it demonstrates how the world plays in favor of men because after the personification Lawrence writes, "and opened it furrow to them (men)" (1-2). So the earth is working for them and it would seem working very hard because the world "heaved" which usually implies the task is hard. This implies that the world is open to men so easily. The scene set in the first passage is of a rural are that is described with phrases like, "the wind blew dry the wet what, and set young ears of corn...So much warmth and generating and pain and death" (2-7). In these lines at first the image is pretty and nice (pastoral imagery) but then "death" and "pain" are mentioned and later "blood" and "beast" (gothic imagery). This stark contrast demonstrates, once again, how the world is helping men, even though it can cause great pain to it. In the context of the setting of this novel, late nineteenth century, women didn't have much freedom or rights but mend id and no one questions that men should have these rights. Then the passage goes on to say, "but women wanted another form of life...something that was not blood-intimacy" (15-16). Once again this dark imagery relating to blood, pain, injury is brought up, but this time it's to demonstrate the contrast between men and women and the lives they want and lead. Women don't want the pain and suffering described previously and for the world to take pain because of them, and it doesn't, because it isn't open freely to them; women don't have the same freedom as men.
Rhetorical questions also further the described contrast between men and women as the speaker questions why men are as they are. For example, "what was it...that raised him above the common men as man is raised above beast?" (55-56). In this question a parallel is drawn between men and beasts. The speaker is asking what about the "vicar" that raised her husband above the other men as beast are above men? With this being a question it makes the thought that men are above beasts seem unsure as the speaker is unsure how the lady's husband is above the other men and the two are paralleled in the question. This furthers the description of the destruction or pain that men can cause in the world because of the question and parallel of men to beast.
Repetition is throughout the passage in the structure of sentences such as the pattern of "dark and dry and small," "money nor power nor position," "sky and harvest and beast and land," (33-34). This repetition in structure emphasizes the bizarre way of men's nature (when the "nor"s are repeated) and the repetition of "and"s emphasizes how much men have opened to them despite what they have done to it. For example, in the line the "sky and harvest..." after that Lawrence writes "she strained her eyes to see what man had done in fighting outwards" (33-34). So man has all of the world open to him yet he damages it in his fight for more, more "knowledge," and access to the world around him.
Lawrence portrays man as destructive in nature because of the freedoms he has been given naturally, while the woman is left to see this and be held back from the world she is not so freely given access to despite her less destructive nature.
Reflection on Essay:
When I was typing this essay up I found many errors, lack of sophistication in writing style, and a plausible but not totally correct interpretation of the work. I looked at the excerpt as more a contrast between the position of women and men in society and how much of the world men have open to them (because of how many more rights they had than women in the time period) in comparison to the limited life that women had. That is the struggle I was portraying that the women was going through but in actuality the struggle was more the rural life she was living in but didn't want. The contrast between women and men relied more on the "outward" versus "inward" positioning than the other diction that I talked about that showed comparison. The woman was looking outward toward the future to the cities and that's what she wanted, not to be stuck in a rural life. But the struggle or "battle" described in the excerpt relied in how the woman was looking outward and wanting to go the city but she didn't know how to attain that goal. I think the key to reaching this understanding was focusing on the "outward" versus "inward" that contrasted the man and woman. Also, I saw the reference to blood and pain often and that is why I thought it had something to do with man's destructive forces but having the background knowledge about DH Lawrence helped a lot in understanding why there was that repetition. Lawrence was known for his Blood Knowledge Philosophy in which he was quoted saying, "My great religion is a belief in the blood, as the flesh being wiser than the intellect." In this he is saying one should follow their instinct or desires and in the excerpt it was the woman's desire to leave her rural life but it was a desire she didn't know how to fulfill. Having this knowledge of DH Lawrence's thought process and beliefs helps tremendously in determining in the meaning of a work. Through this essay I now truly understand the importance of researching the author so we can get this insight. For our presentations last trimester we had to research the author to find out how their background information impacted their writing styles and I knew this step was important but never how important until now.
For this essay when I started reading the excerpt and writing I felt lost and confused and I think this was because of how unfocused on was when I read the excerpt. I annotated the passage but I didn't reread the prompt after it was read aloud and fully realize that I was supposed to be focus mainly on the woman and in the beginning of the essay I feel I focused to much on the man. I think I let the time constraints and the surprise of the essay panic me. I just need to carefully read everything and stay focused for future prompts. I also didn't have much of a short outline of thoughts written down before I started my essay which might have been helpful in developing my thesis and the meaning I connected to each literary device better because I felt like I just came up with the devices and not how they added to the passage and than when I got to fleshing out my thoughts about each literary device I felt I was not fully understanding the effect of the device myself.
Wednesday, November 13, 2013
#18: Final Portfolio Reflection
The assignments I am most proud of are the American
Drama and Comparison and Contrast Paper. I am pleased with my group’s American
Drama Project because I found Who’s Afraid
of Virginia Woolf to be a very difficult play but a very entertaining one.
The meaning took some effort and rereading to understand but we discovered it with
just a little outside help. A lot of meaning lied in the small details of the play
like the porcupine which was repeated a couple times throughout. We looked up
the symbolism of a porcupine and found it symbolized childhood innocence, which
made finding Albee’s view of the sexual revolution much easier. This play is
also the piece of work I’ve struggled most with when it comes to pinning down
my feelings about it. At first I thought it was the craziest thing I had ever read
and I couldn’t understand why anyone would enjoy it but then I became
emotionally attached to the characters after reading and rehearsing the lines so
many times. It was a great learning experience for me in that I finally
understood the joy of analyzing a literary work and how it can provide the
needed insight. If I had just stopped after reading it and thrown the book on
my bookshelf I would have gone through the rest of my life thinking it was the
worst play I’ve ever heard of but now I really like it. I am also proud of the
effort my group put into this project, their acting skills (not mine), and I
overall truly enjoyed most of the time spent creating this project. Our video
was not perfect by any means but I think it was close to the best it was pretty
good considering the time frame and equipment we had. An imperfection in our
video was how choppy it was at parts but that was because we had a hard time
cutting out lines since we felt all of them were important. We ended up having
to do a lot of the cutting after we filmed all of it and realized it was
sixteen minutes long. Another flaw was the narration. It was lacking and didn’t
explain the play as well as it could of. The narration model was truly an afterthought.
We had come up with it before we started filming but wrote the lines for it
after we filmed the play part.
I am also proud of my Compare and Contrast Essay
because I never really thought about the stylistic choices in movies until then
but now I can’t watch a movie without reasoning at least one stylistic choice
(an inevitable perk of taking AP Literature). I liked Angela’s Ashes from the moment I read it but investing the time in
analyzing McCourt’s choices and his message and the director’s choices and his
message made me realize how much I liked it (though it can be time consuming). I
began to truly sympathize with Frank and his situation, to have almost a
connection with a man I’d never met before. It was a strange sensation to be so
connected with a non-fiction book but I found my way of thinking and Frank’s
might not be that different. A theme I really connected with was the chocking
and belittling effect that religion can have on people. Frank clearly showed he
thought this throughout the book and I wrote about it in my essay. I focused
heavily on that theme and found the major differences in how it was
communicated through the book and movie but could have spent more time
analyzing the similarities. Also, I had never formally compared the book and
movie version of a piece of literature but I realized how subtle differences can
make a huge impact on the message received by the audience. I also learned that
few decisions are ever made without some reasoning, whether it is consciously
or subconsciously. That can be annoying from time to time but enlightening as
well.
I know I appear to be a person who doesn’t
participate in class but I want you to know, I do try my best. I haven’t
contributed to the class discussion more than a couple times throughout the trimester.
One class participation moment I remember was when we were discussing the
metaphysical poem my group read and thesis we came up for and I spoke my couple
of comments. I think my lack of participation in whole class discussions stems
from my fear of being wrong in front of a large group. I always listen to what
others are saying and try to come up with my own thoughts on the piece but it
takes me a moment. That being said, I have always contributed when in smaller
groups. When we did group presentations I was usually the first person on and
the last person off of the Google doc. I never allowed the brunt of the work to
fall on one person and I always gave my thoughts on the piece. I was never
completely right but I was still trying to push my group toward the right interruption
and allow for an exchange of ideas. Group work can be frustrating sometimes
when you have those people who don’t do their share and I have never wanted to
be that cause of frustration so I have always been sure to do my part. I took
the lead in formulating a thesis and topic sentences for the Bluebeard/Myth
Presentation my group did to name one specific example of where I did more than
my share of the work. I also always listen fully to what everyone in the group
says and take it into consideration.
When it comes to collaborating on papers, like with the
compare/contrast summer reading essay, I was willing to read anyone’s paper who
asked me and I asked a couple of others who didn’t have people editing theirs
if they wanted me to edit their paper. For the papers I edited I took my time
to carefully read through it and I reread making sure I caught all the things they
could improve on or anything that sounded awkward or unclear. I willingly
accept constructive criticism on all my papers as I know they are never as good
as they could be. Also, when it came to the creative project I talked to other students
about their novels, prompts, and ideas they had for their projects. I gave the
input I could with my limited knowledge of their books and sometimes it helped
while other times it didn’t. Despite all of this, I understand I have some work
to do when it comes to whole class discussion and I will push myself in the
future to become a better participant but I just wanted you to know in smaller collaborations
I have always been a willing participant.
One of my goals after taking the first Diagnostic
Test was to write down the purpose or point being made by the author after I
was done reading each piece before I moved onto questions. This was to ensure
that I wasn’t missing questions related to the subject matter of the poem or prose
passage. My goal was to not be missing those types of questions by November. It
is now November I think I’m getting better, but not as much as I’d like to. On
the first graded test we took, I improved from the diagnostic test (after
corrections) but I still have room to improve. I haven’t completely been
following through with taking a moment to think about the main point of the
text before moving onto questions because I always feel rushed even though I always
finish before we need to be done. This is a goal I still need to work on in
second trimester as I can get overwhelmed with all the passages in the test and
not stop to think about them for half a minute and I think that really inhibits
my understanding.
Another goal I set was using or identifying at least
four literary devices I usually don't use or think of every other week until
November. It is November now and I have not truly stuck to this goal. I have
looked up a couple types of poem patterns and a device or two after we did the
diagnostic test and after we did our first big test (for the ones I still got
wrong after corrections). But those were the only times I did that so I could
definitely improve. I don’t want to continue to miss the big idea and therefore
miss the conceptual questions. I want to institute this goal again going into second
trimester.
My final goal was to learn more poetic forms which I
have done. I learned what a ballad was from our group project where my group
had to research it. I learned what a lyric and ode were after googling them
after taking the diagnostic test. I also have all the types of sonnets pretty
much down after another group project where we had to research the types of
sonnets and their characteristics like a Petrarchan versus a Shakespearean
sonnet. But that was really all the work I have done toward that goal and my
goal was to learn a new type of poetic form and read at least three examples of
poems in that form every three days. Once again I wanted to have these terms
down so I wouldn’t miss questions that should not be that hard compared to more
symbolic questions. I could continue with this goal in reading a couple new
poems every week and trying to analyze them like I would on a test. This will
help with not only identifying poetic forms and literary devices but it would help
get me more adapted at the process.
Sunday, November 10, 2013
#16: Hamlet Blog Post #4: Reponse to Seng's Literary Criticism
I heard about this entry from Peter J. Seng
evaluating the recent occurrences in Denmark. I found his take rather
interesting but skewed. I have, from the very beginning, cared deeply about the
welfare of my daughter and strived to protect her. I am incredibly saddened by
the despair and insanity my daughter dove into before she drowned, weighed down
by my death and Hamlet’s crazy actions. Hamlet was my killer but I also
consider him partially responsible for Ophelia’s death as he “sullied” her as
correctly said by Seng (Seng 220). But Seng also paints me out to be the bad
guy but that is simply not the case. Seng is right in that my daughter did have
a childlike innocence and “gentle nature” (Seng 220). As I had told her before,
she was “a green girl” (1.3.101) and didn’t realize Hamlet’s “tenders” were
fallacious (1.3.107). She did have the opportunity to “tender me a fool,” as
well as herself (1.3.109). I did not want either of our reputations to be
soiled by a silly romance that was not true. Obviously Seng is not a father because
my advice was not “slander,” I was truly trying to help the both of us (Seng
221). I know their love was not true even if Seng says the “relations between
Hamlet and Ophelia” were nothing “other than honest,” I know he is wrong (Seng
222). Maybe for one moment I thought they could be but then I came to my senses
and realized he was a man of higher rank that would only use Ophelia because no
one is who they appear to be. Ophelia had not learned that lesson yet so I had
to teach her. Seng was right that “years of politicking at court” taught me
“better than to believe in men’s words” (Seng 221). It is very unreliable and
“unlovely” so one must be aware of how others will use you and you must be
ready to use them to get what you want (Seng 221). Now I’m not saying I used my
daughter as Seng accuses me of and sacrificed my morals “to political
expediency (Seng 221). I ran to the King with information about Ophelia and
Hamlet’s relationship to not just protect my daughter but to help explain the
cause of his erratic behavior, “the cause of this defect” (2.2.101). I saw Hamlet’s sanity slipping away from him
everyday after his father’s death but I never thought Ophelia would turn just
as mad as he did. My death was so pointless. I wasn’t really spying as Seng
says, I was just put in a compromising position and I wanted to make sure the
Queen was alright since Hamlet was not in a stable state of mind when he went
to talk to her and torture her about her marriage to Claudius. He killed me and
along with me my daughter went as well. I didn’t want the pain and suffering
for my daughter that she endured.
You get a lot of time to think about the life
decisions you made when you’re dead and I can’t help but wonder what things
would have been if I would have never given my daughter any advice. That doesn’t
seem like the proper thing for a father to do but after “she took the fruits of
my advice…he (Hamlet) repelled…fell into a sadness” that he never recovered from
(2.2.144-146). Despite him saying he was just acting crazy and really wasn’t as
mad as everyone thought I think he was not just pretending. His father’s death,
mother’s remarriage, and my daughter rejecting him did some damage. But his murder
of me was what sent him over the edge to violence and when all his “thoughts”
went “bloody” (4.4.66). I had good intentions, I truly did and Seng is right in
that sometimes I had my best interest at heart as well as hers. But I never
thought things would spiral out of control as they did. I never thought Hamlet
would go as mad as to kill me, my daughter would lose her sanity and life. My
death was traumatic for not just my daughter but son who is grieving my death
as well. I don’t think he fully comprehended the poor state his sister was in
after he saw her. But Laertes is definitely not responsible for Ophelia’s degradation
as Seng says. He simply had her best interest at heart and only offered her
that advice once in hopes of keeping her innocent self from being taken
advantage of by Hamlet. But I am concerned for his sanity now as well. He seems
willing to take the vengeful actions that Hamlet has been unable to do. He said
he’d “cut his (Hamlet’s) throat I’ th’ church” and Ophelia’s death will only
enhance his rage (4.6.124).
What Seng says or what anyone says doesn’t matter
much anymore. I can’t go back and change things and I can’t go back to Earth
and change what’s happening now so I must deal with what has happened. Farewell Ophelia. Best of luck Laertes. That’s all
the advice I will give this time.
Friday, November 8, 2013
#15: Hamlet Blog Post #3: To Be or Not To Be?
In Hamlet’s “To Be or Not to Be” soliloquy Hamlet is contemplating life and death and which option he should take.
The uncertainty of death is a main topic of the soliloquy as Hamlet doesn’t enjoy his life but knows what happens after death is truly a mystery to everyone as “no traveller returns, puzzles the will/And makes us rather bear those ills we have”(3.1.80-81). Hamlet realizes although dying may result in less pain than what he feels now he doesn’t know what is next for him so he must stop for a moment to think about both options. As he says, “For in that sleep of death what dreams may come/when we have shuffled off this mortal coil/Must give us pause” (3.1.66-68). He can’t just end his life without knowing what is next.
Hamlet speaks a lot of the pain that he endures in his life and how negative life is by using negative imagery like “suffer/The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune,” (3.1.57-58) “by a sleep to say we end/The heart-ache,” (3.1.61-62) and “bear the whips and scorns of time” (3.1.70).
Hamlet makes appeals to ethos, logos, and pathos in his soliloquy. Ethos (appeal to character of the speaker) is used as in calls into question his character and the character of people who decide not to endure life anymore as he says, “’tis nobler in the mind to suffer” because it is a sin to commit suicide (3.1.57). There is also pathos (appeal to emotion) as he speaks of the pains of life and makes it sound so dreadful for him like with, “For who would bear the whips and scorns of time” and “the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune” (3.1.57-58). Finally, there is logos (appeal to logic) as Hamlet rationalizes that “no traveller returns, puzzles the will/And makes us rather bear those ills we have” (3.1.80-81). No one comes back after their death to tell the rest if there is an afterlife or not and how it is if there is one.
Hamlet doesn’t want to continue so he lists out all the troubles of his life but he doesn’t want to kill himself either for he doesn’t know what happens after death for sure. He doesn’t want to live yet he is too scared to die. Also, “Or to take arms against a sea of troubles,/And, by opposing, end them?” is a paradox because he is relating fighting with the idea of giving up on life (3.1.60-61).
There is parallelism in the lines “For who would bear the whips and scorns of time, / Th'oppressor's wrong, the proud man's contumely/ The pangs of dispriz'd love, the law's delay,” which emphasizes the many trials of life. Also “To die, to sleep./To sleep, perchance to dream,” is parallelism and it highlights the metaphors Hamlet makes between sleep and death and how it might be easier to transition into a prolonged state of sleep rather than continue his life (3.1.65.66).
The use of infinitives adds emphasis to the said action. For example, “to be,” “to die; to sleep,” all highlight that Hamlet is debating what he should do. There is also no subject attached to the verbs in order to further emphasize his uncertainty about what to do.
Hamlet uses death to refer to suicide but he generically refers to it as death so he can speak in general about death and its uncertainties.
The tone of the soliloquy was anguish as Hamlet struggles between the pitfalls of both life and death, realizing there is no ideal option. He is in continual despair as he wishes to die but then finds all these problems with the questions of what happens after death. He is not willing to take that risk of not knowing the answer so he must suffer through his life, he must “grunt and sweat under a weary life,/but that the dread of something after death” (3.1.77-78).
The diction is very descriptive and makes life seem cruel and unkind. He characterizes life as a harsh existence that must be dealt with but it leads to “heart-ache,” and it is “weary,” one must “take arms against a sea of troubles” they encounter throughout it (3.1.77, 59, 62).
The two primary metaphors in Hamlet are Death is a long sleep: “To die: to sleep;/No more; and by a sleepy to say we end/The heartache and the thousand natural shocks” (3.1.61-63). Also, Death is an undiscovered journey: “But that the dread of something after death,/The undiscovered country from whose bourn/No traveler returns,” (3.1.80-82).
Hamlet makes many comparisons about life, death, afterlife, humans, and reason: Life on earth is a painstaking journey: “To grunt and sweat under a weary life,/but that the dread of something after death,” but afterlife is an “undiscovered country from whose bourn/No traveler returns” (3.1.79-81). He compares death to sleep: “To die: to sleep;/No more; and by a sleepy to say we end/The heartache and the thousand natural shocks” (3.1.61-63). He says humans are made cowards by their conscience (reason): “Thus conscience does make cowards of us all,” and “native hue of resolution/ Is sicklied o’er with the pale cast of thought/And enterprises of grate pitch and moment.” Reason is the killer of action as Hamlet doesn’t end his life because he thinks about how he doesn’t and can’t know anything about the afterlife.
Hamlet presents many oppositions throughout as he contemplates life and death. He speaks of the anguish of suffering through life and it would be easier to die but most can’t end their lives due to the uncertainty of death. He says dying would be like having a dream but you don’t know what will happen in that dream so that is scary as well. Also, this fear of uncertainty keep humanity continually thinking about life after death so much they don’t take action as this thought or reason had made “cowards” out of humans (3.1.87-89).
Eternal philosophical question pondered: What is the better option: suffering through life, which may not be enjoyed or dying without any knowledge of what happens after death?
Hamlet concludes humanity endures the cruelties of life because they are scared of the unknown territory that is the afterlife.
Mis En Scene Analysis:
In the Kenneth Branagh version, Hamlet is staring at himself in the mirror to begin it and he is quiet and softer in his voice. This demonstrates he’s taking a look into himself as he is very unsure what course of action he wants to take at this point. He is reflecting on life to figure out if it would just be better to die. He says it softly rather than yelling it to emphasize his uncertainty in his decision between life and death. Hamlet walks closer to the mirror as he is talking and the camera zooms up on his reflection in the mirror because as Hamlet progresses in the soliloquy he gradually reasons why death may not be the best option even though he is drawn to it and he gets closer to his decision of what he will choose: life or death. About half-way through music is added in to make the scene more dramatic as it is a big moment in the play and an important struggle Hamlet goes through. The scene only focuses on Hamlet and what he is saying in this scene due to close up camera angles. Hamlet’s costume is just black and the make-up is minimal because the focus should be on his words and contemplation of life.
In the Laurence Olivier version the scene starts off with music and the camera following the stairs up to where Hamlet is, giving a chaotic feeling to the beginning of the scene which fits Hamlet’s state of mind as he is torn between life and death. Hamlet if facing a sea while he delivers his soliloquy to fit the fact that Hamlet is facing a “sea of troubles” in life (3.1.59). The camera focuses in on the back of his head and then goes to a blury image of the sea, but then back to Hamlet which all seems very strange and chaotic but it reflects the lack of clairty in Hamlet’s head as he has to reason out what he is to do. Hamlet does not say all the lines and some are voiceovers allowing for some parts of the soliloquy to appear like his deep internal thoughts that he is thinking about. The dark scenery and fog gives the scene a darker tone which is appropriate for the serious and darker matter at hand. He is on the edge of the cliff, so close to death, sitting on a rock to speak the soliloquy for a majority of it but then he starts moving away from the edge back into the fog and despair of his life.
In the Mel Gibson version Hamlet is in a dark tomb room with only light from the skylight peering in. He bends over the tomb and leans down as he progresses which shows the dread and disparity that he is enduring in his life but then he rises again as he is speaking of the why humans don’t just end it to avoid the pain of life because he is realizing he will continue in his life because of the uncertainty of death. The tomb is an appropriate choice of setting because he is contemplating death and he might end up somewhere like there. He is in dark attire to reflect his dark attitude and thoughts about life. There are many close up shots of Hamlet and long shots at the end to focus on Hamlet’s thought process and indecision while he determines whether he chooses life or death. In the end he is walking toward the exit of the tomb so he is choosing to continue his life.
In the Ethan Hawke version Hamlet is walking through a video rental store. It starts off as a voiceover then he begins to speak the soliloquy. He walks by action movies and one is also playing on the screen in the store. The action signs all down the movie aisle make the decision of which action to take the most prevalent thing in the scene. This emphasizes the lines where Hamlet talks about humanity’s inaction due to reason and fear of the unknown so just as Hamlet is unsure about taking action in taking his life he is walking by the action movies in the store and not choosing one. Hamlet is wearing a black suit which is dark reflecting his thoughts but it is very formal for a video store so the hat makes him fit in with the video store a little more. The music in the background makes the walk through the video store even more dramatic just as the slow pace with which Hamlet strolls showing how heavy his thoughts are weighing on him.
The Mel Gibson version was the most effective in communicating the soliloquy. The setting was fitting as it was very dark and a place of death. The variation in close up and farther away camera angles reflected the change of thought in the soliloquy and Hamlet’s decision to carry on. The focus was mainly kept on Hamlet throughout the scene and trying to understand his emotions. While the others did this as well there setting or actions of Hamlet weren’t as fitting for the soliloquy. Branagh’s version was good and I like that Hamlet said it while looking at a mirror showing his reflection on life and how he is looking into himself for his decision but there was a lack of movement and everything was kept very static. The changes in camera angles and the position of Hamlet (one moment leaning over the tomb, kneeling on the ground the next, and then rising, walking toward exiting the tomb) all reflected Hamlet’s transition in thought. There was more emotion displayed from Hamlet.
If I were to make changes to the other versions, I would change Branagh’s to have more movement in the scene by changing camera angles a little more than he already did. Also, have Hamlet speak with more fluctuation in his voice, maybe getting a little louder when he speaks of why death may not be the best option and why many humans just don’t kill themselves. In the Hawke version, the setting of a video rental store may not have been the best option. It is such a public place that it makes it hard for Hamlet to show more expression with his volume of voice and body expressions. There was a lot of focus on the screen playing in the store and the action signs on the movies as he walked down the aisle that it took away from Hamlet and what he was saying. There could have been more focus on him and his facial expressions to communicate the meaning and thought process going on during the soliloquy. In the Laurence Oliver version I would tone it down a little bit, possibly less chaos at the beginning because the focus should be primarily on Hamlet, his words, his expressions and thoughts.
The uncertainty of death is a main topic of the soliloquy as Hamlet doesn’t enjoy his life but knows what happens after death is truly a mystery to everyone as “no traveller returns, puzzles the will/And makes us rather bear those ills we have”(3.1.80-81). Hamlet realizes although dying may result in less pain than what he feels now he doesn’t know what is next for him so he must stop for a moment to think about both options. As he says, “For in that sleep of death what dreams may come/when we have shuffled off this mortal coil/Must give us pause” (3.1.66-68). He can’t just end his life without knowing what is next.
Hamlet speaks a lot of the pain that he endures in his life and how negative life is by using negative imagery like “suffer/The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune,” (3.1.57-58) “by a sleep to say we end/The heart-ache,” (3.1.61-62) and “bear the whips and scorns of time” (3.1.70).
Hamlet makes appeals to ethos, logos, and pathos in his soliloquy. Ethos (appeal to character of the speaker) is used as in calls into question his character and the character of people who decide not to endure life anymore as he says, “’tis nobler in the mind to suffer” because it is a sin to commit suicide (3.1.57). There is also pathos (appeal to emotion) as he speaks of the pains of life and makes it sound so dreadful for him like with, “For who would bear the whips and scorns of time” and “the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune” (3.1.57-58). Finally, there is logos (appeal to logic) as Hamlet rationalizes that “no traveller returns, puzzles the will/And makes us rather bear those ills we have” (3.1.80-81). No one comes back after their death to tell the rest if there is an afterlife or not and how it is if there is one.
Hamlet doesn’t want to continue so he lists out all the troubles of his life but he doesn’t want to kill himself either for he doesn’t know what happens after death for sure. He doesn’t want to live yet he is too scared to die. Also, “Or to take arms against a sea of troubles,/And, by opposing, end them?” is a paradox because he is relating fighting with the idea of giving up on life (3.1.60-61).
There is parallelism in the lines “For who would bear the whips and scorns of time, / Th'oppressor's wrong, the proud man's contumely/ The pangs of dispriz'd love, the law's delay,” which emphasizes the many trials of life. Also “To die, to sleep./To sleep, perchance to dream,” is parallelism and it highlights the metaphors Hamlet makes between sleep and death and how it might be easier to transition into a prolonged state of sleep rather than continue his life (3.1.65.66).
The use of infinitives adds emphasis to the said action. For example, “to be,” “to die; to sleep,” all highlight that Hamlet is debating what he should do. There is also no subject attached to the verbs in order to further emphasize his uncertainty about what to do.
Hamlet uses death to refer to suicide but he generically refers to it as death so he can speak in general about death and its uncertainties.
The tone of the soliloquy was anguish as Hamlet struggles between the pitfalls of both life and death, realizing there is no ideal option. He is in continual despair as he wishes to die but then finds all these problems with the questions of what happens after death. He is not willing to take that risk of not knowing the answer so he must suffer through his life, he must “grunt and sweat under a weary life,/but that the dread of something after death” (3.1.77-78).
The diction is very descriptive and makes life seem cruel and unkind. He characterizes life as a harsh existence that must be dealt with but it leads to “heart-ache,” and it is “weary,” one must “take arms against a sea of troubles” they encounter throughout it (3.1.77, 59, 62).
The two primary metaphors in Hamlet are Death is a long sleep: “To die: to sleep;/No more; and by a sleepy to say we end/The heartache and the thousand natural shocks” (3.1.61-63). Also, Death is an undiscovered journey: “But that the dread of something after death,/The undiscovered country from whose bourn/No traveler returns,” (3.1.80-82).
Hamlet makes many comparisons about life, death, afterlife, humans, and reason: Life on earth is a painstaking journey: “To grunt and sweat under a weary life,/but that the dread of something after death,” but afterlife is an “undiscovered country from whose bourn/No traveler returns” (3.1.79-81). He compares death to sleep: “To die: to sleep;/No more; and by a sleepy to say we end/The heartache and the thousand natural shocks” (3.1.61-63). He says humans are made cowards by their conscience (reason): “Thus conscience does make cowards of us all,” and “native hue of resolution/ Is sicklied o’er with the pale cast of thought/And enterprises of grate pitch and moment.” Reason is the killer of action as Hamlet doesn’t end his life because he thinks about how he doesn’t and can’t know anything about the afterlife.
Hamlet presents many oppositions throughout as he contemplates life and death. He speaks of the anguish of suffering through life and it would be easier to die but most can’t end their lives due to the uncertainty of death. He says dying would be like having a dream but you don’t know what will happen in that dream so that is scary as well. Also, this fear of uncertainty keep humanity continually thinking about life after death so much they don’t take action as this thought or reason had made “cowards” out of humans (3.1.87-89).
Eternal philosophical question pondered: What is the better option: suffering through life, which may not be enjoyed or dying without any knowledge of what happens after death?
Hamlet concludes humanity endures the cruelties of life because they are scared of the unknown territory that is the afterlife.
Mis En Scene Analysis:
In the Kenneth Branagh version, Hamlet is staring at himself in the mirror to begin it and he is quiet and softer in his voice. This demonstrates he’s taking a look into himself as he is very unsure what course of action he wants to take at this point. He is reflecting on life to figure out if it would just be better to die. He says it softly rather than yelling it to emphasize his uncertainty in his decision between life and death. Hamlet walks closer to the mirror as he is talking and the camera zooms up on his reflection in the mirror because as Hamlet progresses in the soliloquy he gradually reasons why death may not be the best option even though he is drawn to it and he gets closer to his decision of what he will choose: life or death. About half-way through music is added in to make the scene more dramatic as it is a big moment in the play and an important struggle Hamlet goes through. The scene only focuses on Hamlet and what he is saying in this scene due to close up camera angles. Hamlet’s costume is just black and the make-up is minimal because the focus should be on his words and contemplation of life.
In the Laurence Olivier version the scene starts off with music and the camera following the stairs up to where Hamlet is, giving a chaotic feeling to the beginning of the scene which fits Hamlet’s state of mind as he is torn between life and death. Hamlet if facing a sea while he delivers his soliloquy to fit the fact that Hamlet is facing a “sea of troubles” in life (3.1.59). The camera focuses in on the back of his head and then goes to a blury image of the sea, but then back to Hamlet which all seems very strange and chaotic but it reflects the lack of clairty in Hamlet’s head as he has to reason out what he is to do. Hamlet does not say all the lines and some are voiceovers allowing for some parts of the soliloquy to appear like his deep internal thoughts that he is thinking about. The dark scenery and fog gives the scene a darker tone which is appropriate for the serious and darker matter at hand. He is on the edge of the cliff, so close to death, sitting on a rock to speak the soliloquy for a majority of it but then he starts moving away from the edge back into the fog and despair of his life.
In the Mel Gibson version Hamlet is in a dark tomb room with only light from the skylight peering in. He bends over the tomb and leans down as he progresses which shows the dread and disparity that he is enduring in his life but then he rises again as he is speaking of the why humans don’t just end it to avoid the pain of life because he is realizing he will continue in his life because of the uncertainty of death. The tomb is an appropriate choice of setting because he is contemplating death and he might end up somewhere like there. He is in dark attire to reflect his dark attitude and thoughts about life. There are many close up shots of Hamlet and long shots at the end to focus on Hamlet’s thought process and indecision while he determines whether he chooses life or death. In the end he is walking toward the exit of the tomb so he is choosing to continue his life.
In the Ethan Hawke version Hamlet is walking through a video rental store. It starts off as a voiceover then he begins to speak the soliloquy. He walks by action movies and one is also playing on the screen in the store. The action signs all down the movie aisle make the decision of which action to take the most prevalent thing in the scene. This emphasizes the lines where Hamlet talks about humanity’s inaction due to reason and fear of the unknown so just as Hamlet is unsure about taking action in taking his life he is walking by the action movies in the store and not choosing one. Hamlet is wearing a black suit which is dark reflecting his thoughts but it is very formal for a video store so the hat makes him fit in with the video store a little more. The music in the background makes the walk through the video store even more dramatic just as the slow pace with which Hamlet strolls showing how heavy his thoughts are weighing on him.
The Mel Gibson version was the most effective in communicating the soliloquy. The setting was fitting as it was very dark and a place of death. The variation in close up and farther away camera angles reflected the change of thought in the soliloquy and Hamlet’s decision to carry on. The focus was mainly kept on Hamlet throughout the scene and trying to understand his emotions. While the others did this as well there setting or actions of Hamlet weren’t as fitting for the soliloquy. Branagh’s version was good and I like that Hamlet said it while looking at a mirror showing his reflection on life and how he is looking into himself for his decision but there was a lack of movement and everything was kept very static. The changes in camera angles and the position of Hamlet (one moment leaning over the tomb, kneeling on the ground the next, and then rising, walking toward exiting the tomb) all reflected Hamlet’s transition in thought. There was more emotion displayed from Hamlet.
If I were to make changes to the other versions, I would change Branagh’s to have more movement in the scene by changing camera angles a little more than he already did. Also, have Hamlet speak with more fluctuation in his voice, maybe getting a little louder when he speaks of why death may not be the best option and why many humans just don’t kill themselves. In the Hawke version, the setting of a video rental store may not have been the best option. It is such a public place that it makes it hard for Hamlet to show more expression with his volume of voice and body expressions. There was a lot of focus on the screen playing in the store and the action signs on the movies as he walked down the aisle that it took away from Hamlet and what he was saying. There could have been more focus on him and his facial expressions to communicate the meaning and thought process going on during the soliloquy. In the Laurence Oliver version I would tone it down a little bit, possibly less chaos at the beginning because the focus should be primarily on Hamlet, his words, his expressions and thoughts.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)