So Hamlet's pretty vicious to the women in this play. He orders Ophelia for instance to "get thee to a nunnery" and he tells his mother Gertrude, "frailty, thy name is woman" even though Hamlet isn't terribly robust, as you may have noticed. Now there's been some backlash to us discussing gender dynamics in literature, but this is a really important contemporary approach to the study of literature. It's not the only one, it's not the only one that we do here, but it is one that matters.
So a basic reading of Hamlet would look like this: Claudius has and uses power, Hamlet has power but mostly chooses not to use it, Polonius has less power than he imagines himself to have, and Ophelia and Gertrude have no power. Right? Yeah... not exactly. …show more content…
And then Hamlet doesn't act for scene after scene after scene, except when he stabs Polonius, who while annoying, is innocent. But is this indecision meant to be seen as heroic, like, is Hamlet a weak and wishy washy guy for wasting all his time on investigations, or is it in fact kind of heroic to back check information that you get from a ghost before killing someone.
Amleth, the inspiration for the tragedy, acts decisively and he's certainly seen as a hero, but it's much more complicated in Shakespeare's play. For one thing, as we've seen, ghosts were not necessarily to be trusted.
Oh, a ghost is moving my desk, it must be time for the open letter. No, no, no, no, no. You? No. You are not real. You are not a ghost. You are a digital representation created by Thought Cafe, I am not giving you an open letter, moving along.
Sorry, I'm scared of ghosts. Even though they aren't real; they definitely aren't real. Anyway, there's also the fact that killing a king, even if that king is a usurper, was generally seen as like, not a fantastic idea. Except when it came to …show more content…
Well, except for when he kills Polonius for the unforgivable sin of hiding behind curtains.
So what finally turns Hamlet into an actor? Maybe pirates, maybe nothing. Many critics feel that it's a different Hamlet who shows up in the fifth act, one who has undergone a sea change, literally, and now feels less conflicted about his own mortality.
But it's not like the play immediately becomes a John Claude Van Damme movie, I mean, Hamlet tells Horatio, "There's a special providence in the fall of a sparrow. If it be now, 'tis not to come. If it be not to come, it will be now." That doesn't sound like a guy who's about to go on a slaughtering spree.
When Hamlet does act, it's at the last possible moment, killing Claudius only because he has learned that Claudius was planning to kill him, Gertrude, and Laertes. At a certain point all that stuff about mortal and divine justice and the perpetual cycle of violence goes out the window, and you think, "Hey, maybe I should just kill this multiple murderer."
But then, of course, in doing so, you re-raise all those questions about mortal and divine justice and the perpetual cycle of violence, GAHHH I LOVE
So a basic reading of Hamlet would look like this: Claudius has and uses power, Hamlet has power but mostly chooses not to use it, Polonius has less power than he imagines himself to have, and Ophelia and Gertrude have no power. Right? Yeah... not exactly. …show more content…
And then Hamlet doesn't act for scene after scene after scene, except when he stabs Polonius, who while annoying, is innocent. But is this indecision meant to be seen as heroic, like, is Hamlet a weak and wishy washy guy for wasting all his time on investigations, or is it in fact kind of heroic to back check information that you get from a ghost before killing someone.
Amleth, the inspiration for the tragedy, acts decisively and he's certainly seen as a hero, but it's much more complicated in Shakespeare's play. For one thing, as we've seen, ghosts were not necessarily to be trusted.
Oh, a ghost is moving my desk, it must be time for the open letter. No, no, no, no, no. You? No. You are not real. You are not a ghost. You are a digital representation created by Thought Cafe, I am not giving you an open letter, moving along.
Sorry, I'm scared of ghosts. Even though they aren't real; they definitely aren't real. Anyway, there's also the fact that killing a king, even if that king is a usurper, was generally seen as like, not a fantastic idea. Except when it came to …show more content…
Well, except for when he kills Polonius for the unforgivable sin of hiding behind curtains.
So what finally turns Hamlet into an actor? Maybe pirates, maybe nothing. Many critics feel that it's a different Hamlet who shows up in the fifth act, one who has undergone a sea change, literally, and now feels less conflicted about his own mortality.
But it's not like the play immediately becomes a John Claude Van Damme movie, I mean, Hamlet tells Horatio, "There's a special providence in the fall of a sparrow. If it be now, 'tis not to come. If it be not to come, it will be now." That doesn't sound like a guy who's about to go on a slaughtering spree.
When Hamlet does act, it's at the last possible moment, killing Claudius only because he has learned that Claudius was planning to kill him, Gertrude, and Laertes. At a certain point all that stuff about mortal and divine justice and the perpetual cycle of violence goes out the window, and you think, "Hey, maybe I should just kill this multiple murderer."
But then, of course, in doing so, you re-raise all those questions about mortal and divine justice and the perpetual cycle of violence, GAHHH I LOVE