So in class we have just finished the play Hamlet by William Shakespeare. Throughout the work, Shakespeare touches on many different themes that can further deepen the meaning of the play. One of the themes explored is death. Hamlet ponders the act of killing himself for the entire play and eventually takes action on his plan at the end of the play, taking his life and the life of the king/ his uncle as well as the life of Polonius; the father of his girlfriend.
Shakespeare also incorporates the theme of insanity. In the begging of the play Hamlet tells his friend Horatio that he may act strangely. He was not kidding. By the end of the play Hamlet has almost everyone convinced that he has truly lost his mind. He speaks nonsense and eventually ends up killing two people by the end of the novel. Although Hamlet planned on only acting crazy, I believe that by the end of the novel he had truly lost his mind but Horatio did not realize it because he still believed he was acting.
The third motif explored in Hamlet is that of revenge. The ghost tells Hamlet that he needs to avenge him. Hamlet wholeheartly agrees, thus showing his respect for his dead father. Although when Hamlet does have the perfect opportunity he chooses not to kill his uncle because he was praying and Hamlet did not want him to go to heaven because he had confessed his sins. This act also adds suspense to the play because the audience later finds out that Claudius finds that he cannot pray, so Hamlet could of killed him, thus saving himself ALOT of trouble in the final scenes of the play
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
10 comments:
Senia Lee
I could never really tell if Hamlet kept his insanity throughout the entire novel. He could have possibly used it to his advantage by the end of the story. For example, his insanity is blamed when he killed Polonius (which is still questionable if his death was accidental) and he didn't receive a death sentence of some sort. I don't really know why Shakespeare would want to incorporate the importance of insanity and/or having it as key theme.
Megan S.
I agree with Jessica on the subject of Hamlet faking insanity until he really became insane. Hamlet was so set on showing everyone how insane he was that in doing so it actually came true. Hamlet was starting to show his true insanity during the play about a man killing the king. Hamlet wanted to show that Claudius was guilty so much that it changed Hamlet as a person. I think Horatio saw the change in Hamlet but there was absolutly nothing he could do about it. Horatio was helpless in helping Hamlet become the person he was before the death of his father.
Elizabeth P.
I thought the role that revenge played in the play was interesting; it almost seemed to put up a double standard. On one hand it almost seemed that Shakespeare was saying that those who commit acts of crime need to be punished, that those who know of the crime have the responsibility to act. However on the other hand, Shakespeare also seems to say that if one acts on revenge against the crime the result will be so disastrous that the revenge really won't matter in the end.
Lauren W.
I also agree with jessica on Hamlet using insanity until he actually believes it and becomes insane.One can tell that Hamlet is busy devising some sort of plan to avenge his father's death and the insanity card was a smart move at first. I think that hamlet became too obsessed with pretending to be insane and actually became insane, which ultimately led to his downfall. If Hamlet would not have taken his insanity so far he could have avoided his death and several others, because he would not have made Claudius so angry adbnd he could have avoided killing Polonius which would have removed the entire duel scene.
Revenge is a certainly a major thematic element in this play. If Laertes hadn't sworn vengeance against Hamlet for the death of Polonius and Ophelia, many casualties would have been avoided. If the ghost of Hamlet's father hadn't asked Hamlet to kill Claudius, even more casualties would have been avoided. I'm not saying that they don't have justification to be angry, but if they were more focused on respecting those who were killed and less on resenting the killers, everyone would have been much more content. However, if revenge was removed from this play, it would make for a terrible tragedy!
I believe that the theme of hamlet is more specific than death. I think it is more that death equalizes everyone no matter how hard they try to do otherwise. This is really shown when Hamlet sees his old jester dead in the ground. He knows that even though he was a funny man when he was alive he is just a skull now. Hamlet also shows this when he says the line about a king passing through the guts of a beggar. I think applying this to thighs fall apart that Onkonkwo would have done well to read this book. He might have learned that what you accomplish in life has no bearing on you after death. I think that if Onkonkwo would have gotten that message he would have worried less about achieving great things and would have had a better more wholesome life. I think the lesson of the two together is similar. The lesson of things fall apart seems to be that no matter how hard you try things can fall apart. However if you are like onkonkwo's father who had nothing you have nothing to lose. Both of these texts are attempting to tell people to not worry about materials and other petty things during life but to worry more about the relationships you make and the good times you have.
Drew M
Brian Reuland:
I agree with Senia that I have a hard time believing that Hamlet was truly insane for the entire play. His thoughts and actions, though sometimes erratic, generally have a meaning behind them. For example, his decision not to kill Claudius was very conscious and well thought out. Though it ended up being his downfall, his thinking was extremely logical, had he killed Claudius during prayer and sent him to heaven, then his revenge would not have been complete. this brings up an interesting idea of mine that is probably farfetched but I believe that Hamlet was successful in the play. This is because he mentions several times during the play how little he values his life, so dying is not a big deal. Also, he is able to kill Claudius and most likely send him to hell.
I don't disagree that Hamlet's insanity is all an act, but what is his motive? Is he childish enough to have outbursts just for the attention?
Also, something else we discussed in class: why didn't Hamlet step up and take his rightful throne? Is this also due to his tragic flaw of indecision?
^^^^ Embarrassing, forgot to include my name (Christian Cassman)
I agree with Jessica about Hamlet's insanity. I think in the beginning of the play he was honestly sane and just pretending to be crazy, but by the end, so much had happened that he had actually gone insane. I think, by the time Horatio realized what had happened to Hamlet. it was too late for him to do anything to change it. On revenge, I think Shakespeare shows a double standard. He makes it seem as if people who commit crimes deserve to be punished and revenge should be sought out. On the other hand, when Hamlet tries to revenge his father's death, he ends up causing tragedy for himself and those around him.
Post a Comment