The motivation for Hamlet’s transformation is the charge given to him by his deceased father’s ghost. Before that he is what people could consider normal if not a little depressed. Hamlet is changed to the core of his being. He becomes sharper with his speech. His comments more pointed especially towards his mother, Claudius and Polonius. Internally, it is all he can do to think about how he is to get revenge and kill Claudius.
It is convincing because while he is alone, he rants and raves about what he must do. His appearance, call it, to say is changed because towards those around him, it seems as though he has gone mad.
His transformation is not well received by those who are closest to him. It seems to them like he is pushing them away. Claudius is worried because he fears Hamlet is up to something and he feels like he needs to keep an eye on him. Both Gertrude and Ophelia are concerned for Hamlet because both of them believe that he has gone mentally insane. The change in Hamlet appears to have created a stronger bond between him and Horatio, for it seems Horatio is the only one Hamlet can trust. He is the one who Hamlet contemplates and consults with on how they are to prove that it was Claudius that murdered his father.
Monday, December 15, 2008
Formal Argument- Negative, Did Gertrude betray her husbadn and son
Formal Argument
Gertrude did not betray either her husband or her son. Hamlet feels betrayed because his mother remarried so quickly. But everyone is different. Some people take less time to get over the grieving process. What if Hamlet Sr. and his wife really weren’t that close? It gives no indication that they were. The ghost of Hamlet Sr does tell hamlet Jr not to kill Gertrude but that is because he loved her. Times and circumstances could have dictated situations that caused them to grow apart for a while and so Gertrude felt less attached. When the grieving process was finished, she had her eyes open and her goals clear. By marrying Claudius she would be killing two birds with one stone. She was keeping her position as queen, since she was not born into the royal family but married into it, and she was solidifying her son’s position on the throne should Claudius die as a result of old age or some unfortunate accident. It was all part of Gertrude’s plan. Although she appears dependent and unsure, it is a ploy, a mask to lull others into a false sense of security so that she might accomplish her own ends.
Soliloquy
Bloody bawdy villain! Remorseless, treacherous, lecherous, kindless villain! O vengeance! I would that the God’s have given me half less a mind as to deal with the unworthiness and the inanity of the lout who dares call himself my opponent. Oh Sprits! Perhaps the problem lay not in my opponent himself. Merely his arguments to say. Perhaps they hold sense only to half-wits and those who madness has deemed well enough to bestow its crippling self upon. Yes that is it. That must be it. Let that son of Satan feel the wrath of him above the kings, as all his crimes make themselves manifest. To put that monster in his place I shall speak daggers to him and use none. How in my words he be shent. To give them seals never my soul consent. Alas oh heavens strike me down now so I may be spared the most cruel and torturous death and live til my sins be purged, bound in the blackest night to hear the wail of my adversary’s concernancy. Hark I must away…
By: Tyler Keith with excerpts from William Shakespeare’s Hamlet
Gertrude did not betray either her husband or her son. Hamlet feels betrayed because his mother remarried so quickly. But everyone is different. Some people take less time to get over the grieving process. What if Hamlet Sr. and his wife really weren’t that close? It gives no indication that they were. The ghost of Hamlet Sr does tell hamlet Jr not to kill Gertrude but that is because he loved her. Times and circumstances could have dictated situations that caused them to grow apart for a while and so Gertrude felt less attached. When the grieving process was finished, she had her eyes open and her goals clear. By marrying Claudius she would be killing two birds with one stone. She was keeping her position as queen, since she was not born into the royal family but married into it, and she was solidifying her son’s position on the throne should Claudius die as a result of old age or some unfortunate accident. It was all part of Gertrude’s plan. Although she appears dependent and unsure, it is a ploy, a mask to lull others into a false sense of security so that she might accomplish her own ends.
Soliloquy
Bloody bawdy villain! Remorseless, treacherous, lecherous, kindless villain! O vengeance! I would that the God’s have given me half less a mind as to deal with the unworthiness and the inanity of the lout who dares call himself my opponent. Oh Sprits! Perhaps the problem lay not in my opponent himself. Merely his arguments to say. Perhaps they hold sense only to half-wits and those who madness has deemed well enough to bestow its crippling self upon. Yes that is it. That must be it. Let that son of Satan feel the wrath of him above the kings, as all his crimes make themselves manifest. To put that monster in his place I shall speak daggers to him and use none. How in my words he be shent. To give them seals never my soul consent. Alas oh heavens strike me down now so I may be spared the most cruel and torturous death and live til my sins be purged, bound in the blackest night to hear the wail of my adversary’s concernancy. Hark I must away…
By: Tyler Keith with excerpts from William Shakespeare’s Hamlet
Debate 2 Report
On Friday December 12, 2008, in Room 204 at 8:30am a debate was held to determine whether Hamlet, in Shakespeare’s tragedy Hamlet, was crazy or not. Judges Nicholas Leblond, Yannick Lee, and Jennifer Ross overlooked the debate. Arguing that Hamlet was mentally insane were Ilayda Williamson, Mary Collins, and Michaela Blaser. Those responsible for arguing that Hamlet was not crazy were Kelsey Campbell, Melissa Watson-Shotton, and Jessica Barton.
The affirmative side opened with situations involving those mentally insane and reasons why Hamlet would go insane. There was a little bit of rambling about somewhat morbid topics. The negative opened by saying that their opponents misunderstood the situation and context of the story.
The rebuttals from both sides were strong, clear, and concise. Neither team wasted any time getting right to the point. The second point from both sides included strong arguments as to why Hamlet, or “Paul” according to the judges’ rules, was or was not crazy.
The free-for-all was not particularly interesting it seemed because the crowd seemed rather inattentive. There were some raised voices and even a few vulgar expressions as one of the team members on the affirmative side felt as if a member of the audience was encroaching upon her personal space.
Both sides continued on with strong points and counters challenging each other at every opportunity wasting no second. The side arguing the negative had a particularly strong finish. According to the rulings of the judges, the team arguing that Hamlet was not crazy, the negative side, was the winner in this extensively researched debate.
The affirmative side opened with situations involving those mentally insane and reasons why Hamlet would go insane. There was a little bit of rambling about somewhat morbid topics. The negative opened by saying that their opponents misunderstood the situation and context of the story.
The rebuttals from both sides were strong, clear, and concise. Neither team wasted any time getting right to the point. The second point from both sides included strong arguments as to why Hamlet, or “Paul” according to the judges’ rules, was or was not crazy.
The free-for-all was not particularly interesting it seemed because the crowd seemed rather inattentive. There were some raised voices and even a few vulgar expressions as one of the team members on the affirmative side felt as if a member of the audience was encroaching upon her personal space.
Both sides continued on with strong points and counters challenging each other at every opportunity wasting no second. The side arguing the negative had a particularly strong finish. According to the rulings of the judges, the team arguing that Hamlet was not crazy, the negative side, was the winner in this extensively researched debate.
Debate 1 Report
On Thursday December 11, 2008, at 1:35pm in room 204 a debate was held as to whether Miller’s definition of modern tragedy was appropriate to the modern age. The team arguing in the affirmative, composed of Dawson Lybbert, Justin Sweeney, and Ben Cousins, squared off against the team arguing for the negative, which consisted of Stephanie Boucher, Stephanie MacDonald, and Rebecca Ritchie. Presiding over the debate were Judge Seth Epps, Justice Colton Bissonette, and Keeper of the Peace Logan Lubuk.
The affirmative side opened up by stating what is essential in a tragedy and how a tragedy and a comedy are almost polar opposites. The negative side opened with an explanation of what a tragic character is according to Aristotle. Ms. Boucher also brought up the only relevant point found throughout the course of the debate. She brought up Millar’s definition of tragedy and how it applied more to Shakespearean times. Both rebuttals were more based on attacking the other teams format or way of presenting information and no real progress was made.
The second point for both teams continued on with the affirmative side suffering from a severe lack of points of interest. This resulted in attacks in the form of blonde jokes. The negative retaliated by quelling the attempted harassment of their arguments.
As the free-for-all started, mayhem ensued. It became a yelling match between the two apparent leaders, Mr. Lybbert and Ms. Boucher, of which tragedy was better and why. The rest of the debate continued in much the same fashion minus the yelling. Both teams resorted to insulting each other during the final rebuttals. The result from the judges, in the unanimous, was that the side arguing for the Shakespearean, the negative side, won by a landslide.
The affirmative side opened up by stating what is essential in a tragedy and how a tragedy and a comedy are almost polar opposites. The negative side opened with an explanation of what a tragic character is according to Aristotle. Ms. Boucher also brought up the only relevant point found throughout the course of the debate. She brought up Millar’s definition of tragedy and how it applied more to Shakespearean times. Both rebuttals were more based on attacking the other teams format or way of presenting information and no real progress was made.
The second point for both teams continued on with the affirmative side suffering from a severe lack of points of interest. This resulted in attacks in the form of blonde jokes. The negative retaliated by quelling the attempted harassment of their arguments.
As the free-for-all started, mayhem ensued. It became a yelling match between the two apparent leaders, Mr. Lybbert and Ms. Boucher, of which tragedy was better and why. The rest of the debate continued in much the same fashion minus the yelling. Both teams resorted to insulting each other during the final rebuttals. The result from the judges, in the unanimous, was that the side arguing for the Shakespearean, the negative side, won by a landslide.
Activity 1.5
There are 4 major acts that Hamlet did that can be classified in Maslow’s Hierarchy.They are: The killing of Polonius, the killing of Claudius, the killing of Leartes and when hamlet listens to the Ghost of his father.
The killing of Polonius:
This act can be classified under the Safety section of Maslow’s Hierarchy. He was talking with his mother and he assumed they would be alone. When Polonius made the call for help, Hamlet immediately took to challenge what he considered a threat. He killed Polonius without even realizing who he was. He felt that his and his mother’s safety was jeopardized so he took the appropriate steps to neutralize the threat.
The killing of Leartes:
This act can also be classified under the Safety section. Hamlet and Leartes were dueling and after both Hamlet and Leartes are wounded, both realize that they are to continue fighting until one of them should fall. Hamlet kills Leartes to protect his own livelihood. Although he is unsuccessful in keeping his life, he made attempts to keep it and that is what really counts.
Hamlet listens to his father’s ghost:
This could be considered the Esteem part of the Hierarchy. It could be considered esteem because Hamlet needed a lot of confidence to follow a ghost. He was proving to himself and those with him that he was not too afraid to follow and find out what the requests of a ghost were. He was doing it so he would be able to feel comfortable with himself knowing he did all he could to fulfill the request of his late father.
The killing of Claudius:
This could be considered Self-actualization. Hamlet feels that his reason for being is to kill Claudius once he learns that it was Claudius who was responsible for his father’s death. Having Claudius alive was what Hamlet considered a problem. He took the appropriate measures to solve that problem. He makes it his sloe purpose in life, his being, his thoughts, his morals, all change to accommodate what he must do to rid himself of Claudius.
Activity 1.3
Hamlet transforms the actual reality into his own by basically ignoring everything that is going on around him and focussing on his single goal: avenge his father by killing Claudius. He lost sight of his education. He ignored the possibility of the threat posed by Fortinbras. He became single-minded in his determinations.
Gertrude creates her own reality by essentiall living in a dream world. She ignores her late husbands death and instead focusses on her new husband and her supposedly depressed and suicidal son. She stays under the self induced illusion that everything is going well and that there are no problems in her life.
Claudius lives in a scared reality he created himself by murdering Old Hamlet. He lives in constant suspicion of everyone. He relies on only those whose emotions he can manipulate. He fears Hamlet most because he knows that Hamlet is the rightful heir to the throne. He plots to have Hamlet killed so that he can finally live in peace without fear of being dethroned.
The family unit was once critical to society. As time progresses the family becomes less and less important. One of the reasons for this is that divorce and separation are becoming more prevalent. It was the basis with which society founded its rules. It made those rules to reflect the values of the family. To quote "Together we stand, divided we fall," is applicable here. The fmaily is the backbone of society. This is because every working member of society is either working for themselves or for their family. If the family starts to crumble then the people within the society will begin caring and thinking for only themselves. If that happens, and compassion between people is lost, society and it's rules will cease to exist. This is why the family unit is important
Gertrude creates her own reality by essentiall living in a dream world. She ignores her late husbands death and instead focusses on her new husband and her supposedly depressed and suicidal son. She stays under the self induced illusion that everything is going well and that there are no problems in her life.
Claudius lives in a scared reality he created himself by murdering Old Hamlet. He lives in constant suspicion of everyone. He relies on only those whose emotions he can manipulate. He fears Hamlet most because he knows that Hamlet is the rightful heir to the throne. He plots to have Hamlet killed so that he can finally live in peace without fear of being dethroned.
The family unit was once critical to society. As time progresses the family becomes less and less important. One of the reasons for this is that divorce and separation are becoming more prevalent. It was the basis with which society founded its rules. It made those rules to reflect the values of the family. To quote "Together we stand, divided we fall," is applicable here. The fmaily is the backbone of society. This is because every working member of society is either working for themselves or for their family. If the family starts to crumble then the people within the society will begin caring and thinking for only themselves. If that happens, and compassion between people is lost, society and it's rules will cease to exist. This is why the family unit is important
Sunday, December 14, 2008
Activity 1.4 Advertisement
Does that odour from your dog stink up the house? Does car reek because of your son’s gym clothes? Is you bathroom aroma not the greatest?
Look no farther for the air freshener that’s perfect everywhere. It needs absolutely no electricity and doesn’t take up very much room. This perfect little thing can go with you anywhere. Comes in so many varieties you can’t count them. It's even got a smile to brighten up any bad day. All you need is A Father’s Cure.
If you’re still not convinced, check our customer feedback.
Telmah Roines: “But soft, methinks I scent the morning air”
Anne Stains: It’s incredible. It actually works.
A Father’s Cure. The Solution to Everything*
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
