breaden’s 12th grade english blog

1. Why does Hamlet wait so long to kill Claudius? What are the reasons for his hesitation? How valid are they? How many times does he have the opportunity to attack Claudius? What are his reasons for not doing so?

   Hamlet waits to kill Claudius because he is still uncertain about the latter’s guilt. He is not wanting to rush into an action that may not have justification at all. He is a scholar after all, not a murderer. The act of killing his uncle would still be very difficult for a person like him. He has the chance of killing Claudius in the church, but he doesn’t feel that killing him at a time when he would be released of his sins, is appropriate, as his own father was not given such an option.

   
   

2. Hamlet claims that his madness is feigned, an “antic disposition” which he puts on for his own purposes (I.v.172). Why would Hamlet want to feign madness? How can an appearance of insanity help him achieve his ends? Is he really sane throughout the play, or does he ever cross the line into madness? What about Ophelia’s mad scene? Is it real or feigned? Is there “method in her madness” as well, or is she entirely irrational? (What two reasons do her songs suggest?)

   Though Hamlet claims to be feigning madness so that he can move about Claudius with more ease, there are many cases where it would appear that he has actually snapped. By appearing mad, he is apparently, less of a threat to his uncle, and thus able to throw people off to his true intentions. However his uncle is less than believing, often times even quoting that Hamlet is surely sane, and possessing pure troubling thoughts. I think that at times Hamlet does cross over into a madness. Being obsessed with the murder of his father, and the act of murdering his uncle is enough to drive anyone insane. His deep contemplations do not simply suggest a strong mind at work, they can also mean a deep, darkly clouded mind at work.
   Ophelia is in my opinion, insane by the time she takes her own life. She has been abandoned and abused by all the strong males in her life, and she has never been really able to stand up to them. Although this madness may be an attempt to bring Hamlet back to his senses, I think that in starting out this way, she ends up condemning herself to that which she pretends. We are what we pretend to be, right Mr. Stearns?

   
   

3. Pay attention to the treatment of the women characters Gertrude and Ophelia. Is there any basis for the Freudian interpretation of an Oedipal attraction between Hamlet and his mother? Hamlet does seem obsessed with his mother’s sexuality. How old is Hamlet? How old do you think Gertrude is? Is Hamlet’s disgust at Gertrude’s sexuality justified? To what extent is Gertrude guilty? Was she “in on” her husband’s murder? Has Claudius confided in her since the murder? How does Hamlet’s perception of his mother affect his behavior or attitude toward Ophelia?
   Why does he tell Ophelia to go to a nunnery? Does Hamlet really love Ophelia? If so, why is he cruel to her?

   I think that Gertrude is probably innocent, or if not, a most cunning woman. Claudius obviously isn’t telling her these things, as she drank from the cup of poison as well. I also think that there is an Oedipal attraction between Hamlet and his mother, as is seen in the way he addresses her in her chamber. His attitude towards her most definitely affects his attitude towards Ophelia as well in that he can’t stand human beings any longer, and in an effort to keep Ophelia pure, wants her to join a nunnery. It could be considered actual care, even though his efforts seem so very cruel.

   
   

4. Suicide is an important theme in Hamlet. Discuss how the play treats the idea of suicide morally, religiously, and aesthetically, with particular attention to Hamlet’s two important statements about suicide: the “O, that this too too solid flesh would melt” soliloquy (I.ii.129–158) and the “To be, or not to be” soliloquy (III.i.56–88). Why does Hamlet believe that, although capable of suicide, most human beings choose to live, despite the cruelty, pain, and injustice of the world?

   For Hamlet, the unknown is what scares him the most. Surely he suffers torments in life, but after that, he knows not what awaits him. Thus the religious influence on the idea of suicide, certainly affects his opinion on it. A cowards escape so to speak is even worse, than bearing out the torments of life, or so Hamlet believes. He does not want to make a choice he will be unable to change for eternity. He is a philosopher and thus becomes deep in meditation as to whether or not suicide is a viable option.

   
   

5. Choose a soliloquy in the play to look more closely at. Paraphrase it and then connect it to the larger themes in the play.

   ” Ah, I wish my dirty flesh could melt away into a
   vapor, or that God had not made a law against suicide.
   Oh God, God! How tired, stale, and pointless life is
   to me. Damn it! It’s like a garden that no one’s
   taking care of, and that’s growing wild. Only nasty
   weeds grow in it now. I can’t believe it’s come to
   this. My father’s only been dead for two months—no,
   not even two. Such an excellent king, as superior to
   my uncle as a god is to a beast, and so loving toward
   my mother that he kept the wind from blowing too hard
   on her face. Oh God, do I have to remember that? She
   would hang on to him, and the more she was with him
   the more she wanted to be with him; she couldn’t get
   enough of him. Yet even so, within a month of my
   father’s death (I don’t even want to think about it.
   Oh women! You are so weak!), even before she had
   broken in the shoes she wore to his funeral, crying
   like crazy—even an animal would have mourned its mate
   longer than she did!—there she was marrying my uncle,
   my father’s brother, who’s about as much like my
   father as I’m like Hercules. Less than a month after
   my father’s death, even before the tears on her cheeks
   had dried, she remarried. Oh, so quick to jump into a
   bed of incest! That’s not good, and no good can come
   of it either. But my heart must break in silence,
   since I can’t mention my feelings aloud.”

Here Hamlet is expressing his scorn and contempt for his mother’s weakness, and her ability to cope with her husband’s death so easily by marrying his far inferior brother. This fact is making him miserable, and he would like nothing more than to fade away into silence. However he can’t mention these feelings, and thus he suffers alone.

This is related to the themes of the play involving suicide, and the fact that humans are by their very nature, disgusting beings not worthy of the ground they walk upon.

While the article is effective in teaching us all about getting off with a big start, and making sure that we have time to finish the entire essay. However, what it falls short on is it’s explanation of how we should piece our essay’s  together. No real detail is spent on how to make the essay stronger by way of putting certain arguments before others, or how much information is necessary to clearly convey a point. These are things which are probably a little more important, at least to me, than managing time, which is not to say that that isn’t important, just rather a more secondary figure I think.

Or rather a quite hilarious proposal indeed. To sell homeless children for food seems like an outrageous idea, and in truth it quite honestly is, however this is all part of Mr. Swift’s plan to engage the reader and to point out how ridiculous ideas become when a country is looking to solve  economic crisis’s.

“I grant this food will be somewhat dear, and therefore very
proper for landlords, who, as they have already devoured most of
the parents, seem to have the best title to the children.”

In this excerpt, it is very apparent that what we are reading is satire. As Mr. Swift speaks about feeding babies to landlords, he also claims that these same men have already devoured most of the parents in an attempt to convey the idea that the rich swallow the poor in the country, and that measures taken to reduce poverty will most likely end up feeding the rich even more.

“Those who are more thrifty (as I must confess the times require)
may flea the carcass; the skin of which, artificially dressed,
will make admirable gloves for ladies, and summer boots for fine
gentlemen.”

Again, Swift is simply laughing at the countless ways these “children” could be used even when not being eaten. The children like their oxen counterparts, are easily used in many other fashions, as well.

In G.K. Chesterton’s On Lying in Bed, he utilizes a great number of strategies which serve to enhance his understanding of this seemingly unimportant aspect of life. Humor of course is a big part of it, which can be seen in the way he speaks so seriously of a matter so small. This is a technique used by comedians all around and when done by a strong writer, can have an equally hilarious effect on the reader. Chesterton also employs such techniques as parallelism, as seen in his sentence structure, which make his essay flow much nicer. Allusions are also made not only to biblical figures, but also those of many great pieces of literature such as Cyrano de Bergerac, which give him credibility as a connoisseur of the fine arts. Metaphor is also a weapon in his arsenal, which he uses to great effect in making the essay much more fun to read all in all. Fairy rain, carpets, colors, all become enhanced with his playful yet intelligent approach to the subject.

In As He Himself Puts It, the man is appealing to his wife and children to come to America by using an array of tantalizing offers and descriptions about the country. Hyperbole is used more than once as he attempts to portray a place where literally no wrong can be done. He will have a great mass of land, plenty of food to feed them with, and even enough money to purchase them gifts of no consequence. He even goes as far as to say that poverty doesn’t exist in this place near the Hudson River. At a time when Britain was experiencing mass poverty and oppression, his descriptions were obviously acting as an answer to all his family’s hopes and aspirations.

Affirmative action to me seems like a completely sensible system in that it is quite true for many minority citizens, that they come from harder backgrounds, and may need an extra push to get certain jobs or positions. That being said, it should not rule over the job market or college acceptances, but rather should be used in a way that pits two equals against each other and maybe helps out the minority at the person in charge’s discretion.

Affirmative action is a complete was of time in that it hurts many deserving workers from getting jobs they want among many other things, simply because of their skin color. It is discrimination against Caucasians which shouldn’t be allowed in any situation. Not because of their white skin tone, but rather because discrimination in and of itself is wrong in all cases.

I. Introductory Paragraph

            a. Thesis- Our country is unique in that we the citizens command how much control the government commands us by.

II. Argument 1- our government is split up into several different branches thus not making it very central.

III. Argument 2- The public can change the views of our politicians.

IV. Support Paragraph- I agree in that western countries are much more similar as opposed to Eastern countries with whom we differ with.

V. Conclusion-Bring it all back together in a nice central wrap.

http://todayspictures.slate.com/20080326/

(Magnum Photos)

This image is quite captivating in the way that it uses stark contrasts of light to clearly show a man at his ends. The title, Man at the Race Tracks, offers us somewhat of an inside glance at what is ailing the man, who is holding his head in his hand. From this title we can assume that things went awry, and either his horse or some other animal that he bet on, did not do what he intended, and lost. The image really strikes the reader because of the shadowing that appears on the right side of the man’s face, leaving the left for all intensive purposes, still rather white. The air of despair around this person is captured quite clear amazingly enough, as everything from the wrinkled, and somewhat grimy face, to the wrinkled clothes and disheveled hair, speak of a downfall. Of course this is all speculation, and clearly what the photographer is intending to show us, so it is also quite possible that in being part of the camera shy department, this man was simply someone who went in early and was completely tired at the moment the photographer snapped a shot of him. It’s really all up to the viewer, but in a way that is what makes image rhetoric so amazing.

As Mr. Canaday has great experience with analyzing works of art, he has no trouble using visual rhetoric terminology to describe the two portraits The Peale Family and The Bellelli Family. In addition, he is able to see aspects of the paintings that the casual viewer would overlook. For instance, Canaday notices that although the family seems to be divided into two groups, they remain united through eye contact, the resting of hands on shoulders, the spilled fruit present in both sides, and one side painting a portrait of subjects in the other group. He also catches minor artistic errors, such as skewed body proportions. In order to increase his credibility, he gives background information on the history of each family, and specific family members. Furthermore, he mentions that he graduated from Yale, and that he has both taught and professionally critiqued art. If the opinion of such an individual cannot be considered credible, then my inexperienced and woefully underdeveloped analysis of the two paintings should be instantly disregarded. Recognizing this fact, I do not dare imply that my personal views on the painting are to be taken as the true way the portraits are meant to be interpreted. However, prior to reading Canaday’s essay, there were some things that I saw differently than him. For instance, I thought the division in the Peale family (through spacing) was meant to be more meaningful than simply giving the individuals more personal room. It could perhaps symbolize an issue dividing the family in two.

The book review I read on Powell’s was for The Roman Triumph, by Mary Beard. The book is about the way in which the Roman Triumphs of old were about so much more than simply basting a leaders chest in blood, and parading around the city with the defeated fallen before them. It in fact truly marked the health of the country’s political system at the time. Taking the wrong approach to a triumph could have dire consequences as well. If it was done in Pompey’s fashion, a complete loss of power, respect, and dignity could be the result. In Caesar’s, well rather the opposite right? I thought that the book review was really good in that it truly summed up, what I can only have faith is the essence of the book, in a manner which is very simple to understand and follow. Besides that, the writing is very strong, and I did not once doubt the authority of this person on the book she was explaining. To help shed some modern context, George Bush’s airport scene, having come back from Iraq claiming victory, is as good an example of a modern day triumph as I think will ever be found.