Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
About Me
- Bryan Owens
- Blogs are hilarious. If you spend an hour or two just browsing peoples' blogs--you tend to learn some unfortunate things about people in general. For instance, people are generally very boring, and they think that what they are talking about is VERY important. Much like I'm doing now. This whole blogging sensation is a free, easy, accessible way for people to publish a space that is entirely their own; the purposes of which are predominately to make themselves feel self-important. Everyone has something to say about everything. I haven't decided yet if this blogging sensation, as I have flippantly deemed it, is a good thing or a bad thing. Perhaps neither, perhaps both. I don't know.
You will select a question from the list below and respond to it for the Act I thread. You will also respond to another classmate's post. (You should have two posts total for Act I).
ReplyDelete-What is "rotten in the state of Denmark," as Marcellus tells us? What do we learn about the situation in Scene I? In Scene II?
-In what ways is Scene II a contrast to Scene I? What do we learn about Gertrude, Claudius, and Hamlet in this scene?
-What is the function of the Polonius-Ophelia-Laertes family in this play? What parallels exist between their situation and that of the ruling family?
-What does Hamlet learn from the Ghost's speech?
-In scene II, why does Hamlet contemplate suicide? In his solioquy, he resolves not to commit suicide because of God's law against it. However, at the end of Act I, Hamlet resolves to murder Claudius. Discuss how religion will dictate the events of the play.
Elias Kassir Reponding to a Question:
ReplyDelete-What is "rotten in the state of Denmark," as Marcellus tells us? What do we learn about the situation in Scene I? In Scene II?
In scene 1, you learn that the king of Denmark recently died, and so it is safe to assume that Denmark is (for the time being) relatively unstable. This instability likely sets a rather depressing mood throughout the country, as well as the fact that many will likely still be mourning for the death of King Hamlet. This is likely what is "rotten in the state of Denmark." The guards who see the ghost also believe that the appearance of the ghost in the image of the late king may be a sign of impending misfortune, further indicating that something is amiss.
In scene 2, the reader finds out that the new King of Denmark is King Cladius and that he has married the late king's wife, Gertrude. Laertes, the son of Polonius, asks to leave for France, which can also be an indicator that Denmark is not a particularly desireable place to be for the time being. It is also in this scene that the reader realizes that Denmark may very well go to war soon, because Fortinbras' forces will probably invade soon. All of these things go to show that Denmark is not in a very good state for the time beimg.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteNatalia Sanchez responding to:
ReplyDelete-In what ways is Scene II a contrast to Scene I? What do we learn about Gertrude, Claudius, and Hamlet in this scene?
Scene I clarifies the setting of the story of Hamlet, whereas scene II introduces the main characters and their present attitudes now that the king is dead. The first scene is necessary for explaining the situation that Denmark is currently in. We learn that the king, Hamlet’s father, has died and that extra security has been placed upon the palace in fear of an attack from Norway. Most importantly, we are introduced to the ghost of Hamlet’s father. Horatio becomes an important aspect of setting up the issue, because as an educated person, his witness gives credibility to the fact that the ghost is real. Claudius’ long speech at the beginning of scene II defines his character. It’s clear that he’s trying hard to convince everyone to move on from his brother’s death, saying that while he’s grieving, his focus has been shifted toward his new marriage and the threat from Norway. The scene is significant because it shows the tension between Claudius and Hamlet. Hamlet is depressed and torn apart not only by his father’s death, but also by how quickly his mother was to marry Claudius. He doesn’t see the point in living anymore, but it is apparent he is loyal to religion by rejecting the option of suicide. Gertrude’s wish for Hamlet to move on and accept what has happened gives the reader a sense of suspicion toward her. Either she is a heartless fool who has fallen for Claudius, or she’s a deceitful mastermind who played a role in the death of her ex-husband.
What is "rotten in the state of Denmark," as Marcellus tells us? What do we learn about the situation in Scene I? In Scene II?
ReplyDeleteAlthough it is not necessarily known at the beginning of the play, something is clearly “rotten in the state of Denmark.” This is implied by the uptight nature of the guards as they stand watch. The meeting of King Hamlet’s spirit is another indication of something clearly being wrong. Upon Hamlet leaving to speak to the ghost, Marcellus suggests that they follow him, despite Hamlet’s orders to stay put. In this exchange with Horatio, Marcellus's sustains the misgiving mood of the play. What he says, “Something is rotten in the state of Denmark,” reinforces the point and tone of some of Hamlet's remarks made earlier— that Denmark is “an unweeded garden” of “things rank and gross in nature.” But I guess I should answer the question now..
In scenes I and II, you merely learn of the existence of Hamlet’s father’s spirit and that, shortly after his death, Gertrude moved on and married his brother. You also learn of Hamlet’s distress caused by the situation. His mother, he feels, has not mourned nearly as much as is expected, and Hamlet is clearly suspicious of the odd behavior around the castle. As you read further into the act, it is learned that Hamlet was right to be suspicious, as his uncle murdered his father in order to gain the throne.
Karyn responding to:
ReplyDeleteIn scene II, why does Hamlet contemplate suicide? In his soliloquy, he resolves not to commit suicide because of God's law against it. However, at the end of Act I, Hamlet resolves to murder Claudius. Discuss how religion will dictate the events of the play.
Hamlet contemplates suicide in Scene II because the new life he has to live is too painful for him. Hamlet now has to learn how to live without his father, which is a tough task to carry out. On top of that his mother, Gertrude, has betrayed him and his father by marring his uncle, Claudius. To Hamlet it is hard to move on with life because of all the pain that he has to deal with on a day to day life. When he reveals he is not going to commit suicide it’s because of God’s law against. Hamlet would have been dammed to hell if he actually committed suicide. This illustrates irony because he ends up wanting to kill Claudius at the end of Act I. Even with the importance on religion during this time period Hamlet wanted to do this to seek avenges for his father. Claudius killed Hamlets father and because of this Hamlet feels it’s necessary for Claudius to die. This could be explained with the saying “an eye for an eye,” because of the fact that Hamlet finds it necessary to seek revenge on Claudius.
Religion dictates the events in the play because of the importance religion had on the society during that time period. Religion dictated how people acted during that time period and it was the bases of what was right and what was wrong. Religion is the reason why Hamlet did not commit suicide, which is an example of how religion dictates the events of the play. It stops some from doing wrong, while others do not care.
Karyn responding the Elias Post:
ReplyDeleteI agree with the examples Elias used for what was "rotten in the state of Denmark." The state of Denmark was dealing with a lot of change that followed the death of King Hamlet which would have created a chaotic state in Denmark. The people of Denmark were now mourning the death of the King which would make the mood throughout Denmark rotten. I also agree with his statement that the presence of King Hamlet’s ghost shows a sign of misfortune. The fact that he was making himself visible shows that there was something that still needed to be resolved. This sets up something rotten by the fact that something is about to happen.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWhile I agree with what you are saying, I think it necesary to keep in mind that Shakespeare was a brilliant playwright, and like anyone who is involved in theatre, had a love of the dramatic. People who love drama tend to shy away blatantly obvious facts (I think). So it is necesary to look beyond the obvious when talking about what was "rotten in the state of Denmark". For example, obviously the recent death of the king and Gertrude's betrayal and the instability in the country are all bad things, but this is very obvious. It is possible that what Shakespeare meant by "rotten" was that due to the preparations for war, the booming agricultaral harvest was not being harvested, and fruits were rotting in the fields. Or perhaps he was referring to the late king's body rotting in the ground. I at first thought it could have referred to the late king's soul rotting in hell, but as that would be taking place in hell and not Denmark, it would not fit with "rotten in the state of Denmark".
ReplyDeleteSome may think this is idiotic, to them I say they clearly don't know Shakespeare.
Nathan van Arkel-Priest responding to question 1; "What is "rotten in the state of Denmark," as Marcellus tells us? What do we learn about the situation in Scene I? In Scene II? "
ReplyDeleteWhen the play opens, the audience is quickly informed (through the banter between Bernardo, Horatio and Marcellus)that the throne of Denmark has been usurped by Claudius from the elder Hamlet. Immediately, we see that the ghost of the late king still haunts the land, indicating that something is amiss. We come to understand that ghosts roam the land when they leave the earth, but have not concluded their affairs. It is because of this that something must be "rotten in the state of Denmark" to necessitate the haunting by the ghost of King Hamlet. Additional, the reader learns that Denmark is preparing for war, with the armor that the ghost appears in further reinforcing this belief.
In scene II it is relieved that not only has Claudius become the King of Denmark, but he has also married Hamlets mother, much to Hamlet's dissatisfaction. The quick remarriage of Hamlet's mother (occurring less than a month after King Hamlets death) is therefore undoubtedly a factor that contributes to the stench that pollutes Denmark.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteJulia Rodriguez responding to:
ReplyDeleteWhat is the function of the Polonius-Ophelia-Laertes family in this play? What parallels exist between their situation and that of the ruling family?
The Polonius-Ophelia- Laertes family in the play Hamlet provides the antithesis to that of the ruling family. Yet the contrast also provides similarities of both families. Act I scene 3 provides this contrast, after the scene before portrays the dysfunctional state of Hamlet’s family, the following scene portrays the appearance of normalcy of Polonius’s household. Polonius speech advising Laertes on how to behave in France shows much fatherly affection in contrast to Hamlet’s state of loss and despair. Similarly in Act 1 scene 5 there will be another father to son speech only by Prince Hamlet and the ghost of his father. While Polonius and Laertes seem to have a relatively normal father and son relationship, their relationship to Ophelia is somewhat disturbing. They both assume authority over her and try to control her. When Ophelia tells her father of her feelings about Hamlet he treats them as though they are irrelevant, and feels like Hamlet would use her and then discard her because she can never be his wife due to the differences in social class. Laertes questions her judgment and in his speech to Ophelia there lies incestuous undertones, similar to that of Claudius’s marriage to his brother’s wife and Hamlet passionate conflicting feelings for his mother.
What is the function of the Polonius-Ophelia-Laertes family in this play? What parallels exist between their situation and that of the ruling family?
ReplyDelete"O, what a noble mind is here o'erthrown"- Ophelia
Ophelia, Laertes, and Polonius underscore the theme of corruption that spreads throughout Denmark and eventually causes everyone to fall to ruin. These characters are only relevant in the context of Hamlet's beliefs and actions. They all aid the audiences realization of a significant question: is Hamlet truly insane? Is he just pretending or does he eventually truly become mad?
Ophelia is portrayed as pure, innocent, and completely obedient. Her purpose in “Hamlet” is to provide contrast for Hamlet’s skewed view of women. Hamlet’s view of women is one of abhorrence. Because of Gertrude, Hamlet believes women are corrupt and lascivious. Ophelia is the antithesis of the way Hamlet views women. Hamlet treats Ophelia in extremes: one minute he expresses his love for her, the next he expresses his disgust of her. The “something rotten” in Denmark spreads throughout the characters like poison, affecting them all. She becomes rather more relevant to the plot of Hamlet after she is dead, inspiring the fatal duel between Laertes and Hamlet that leads to the death of all major characters.
Laertes is Ophelia's loyal defender to the end and he genuinely cares for her. Laertes’ character provides the climax of the play: the duel with Hamlet. Laertes tries to protect Ophelia from Hamlet early in the play and later blames him for her death. The hinted theme of incestual desire in the play is shown in Laertes' character. Some scholars have hypothesized that like Hamlet’s feelings towards Gertrude, Laertes may have more than familial love towards Ophelia.
Polonius is a mettlesome man who is often portrayed as being obsessed with obtaining and maintaining his high position in the court of Claudius. Sometimes, it is hinted that he may have had a hand in King Hamlet's death, but it isn't really implied in the text so I tend to believe this is mostly imagination on the part of directors. Polonius seems to care for Ophelia, or at least be interested in preserving her chaste image. Polonius is also a character that becomes far more relevant to the plot after he has died. His death worries Claudius about his own safety and he begins to plot in earnest about how to get rid of Hamlet.
All of the characters are linked in death. Each death in Hamlet is contagious, leading to the death of more characters. Therefore, all the characters are connected. Ophelia's family underscores Hamlet's questionable state of sanity, drives the action of the play with their deaths, and shows Hamlet's abhorrence of women.
Cara commenting on Karyn's post
ReplyDeleteI agree with Karyn. Hamlet is the most intellectual of all of Shakespeare’s protagonists. He is also the most contemplative. He likes to think about all the deep questions in life and particularly the meaning of it. Before the beginning of the play, Hamlet and Ophelia have a budding romance that is apparently full of courtly romance. He studies in Wittenberg and appears to enjoy his studies there. He has a friendship with Horatio. Yet, when the death of his father, the appearance of a ghost in Act I, and the marriage of his mother to the evil Claudius, Hamlet becomes disillusioned with humanity. “How weary, stale, flat, and unprofitable. Seem to me all the uses of this world” Hamlet says in Act I. He becomes disappointed with humanity and sees no purpose in living.
Responding to Question:
ReplyDelete-What is "rotten in the state of Denmark," as Marcellus tells us? What do we learn about the situation in Scene I? In Scene II?
In scene 1, Barnardo, Marcellus, and Horatio see the ghost of the recently deceased King Hamlet because he was wearing the armor King Hamlet wore when he battled against the armies of Norway, and the same frown he wore when he fought against the Poles. Horatio believes that the ghost's appearance is to warn them about a threat to Denmark. A person's soul is often unable to move on after life because they have some unfinished business and it makes sense for the King to try warn his people of some future danger. It is evident that the king of Denmark was beloved by his people because in the beginning of scene 1, Barnardo responds "Long live the King!" when he is asked by Francisco to identify himself. And Francisco tells Barnardo that he is, "sick at heart", and we can assume that it is because he is sad by the King's death. The men's dismay reflects the feelings of the people of the kingdom and that's what Marcellus could be referring to when he says "rotten in the state of Denmark." There is a fear that's surrounding the people as they wait the transfer of power.
In scene 2, we find out of Claudius's recent marriage to Getrude, who was the King's wife; making him the king now. Hamlet is still mourning which is evident by the fact that he still remains to wear black clothes. His mother's hasty decision to marry his uncle and his uncle's motives are very suspicious as they both act like nothing has happened, and Hamlet knows it. Scene II gives the reader reason to believe that the ghost does indeed appear to warn of the dangers Denmark may face as the scene furthers the idea of saying that Fortinbras seeking to reconquer lands his father lost to King Hamlet. And Claudius's and Getrudes's behavior lead people to believe that they might have taken part in the king's death.
In scene II, why does Hamlet contemplate suicide? In his solioquy, he resolves not to commit suicide because of God's law against it. However, at the end of Act I, Hamlet resolves to murder Claudius. Discuss how religion will dictate the events of the play.
ReplyDeleteThe use of religion in the play is not consistent, and is more the whim of Hamlet that a steadfast response to Biblical dictates. When Hamlet considers suicide, which he does out of remorse of the darkness of Denmark and the confused and immoral situation of his family, he is not honestly seeing suicide as an option. Hamlet's character is far too ambiguous to make a decision that would give him no other options. He is merely musing and inwardly discussing his indecision.
Suicide is a sin, as is murder, but suicide is permanent. Should Hamlet gathered the courage to take his own life, he would be therefore damned to hell. Perhaps he would be condemned to hell for revenge murder as well, but his life would not end in that moment. While his action would be permanent, it would not permanently end his in that instant.
Hamlet makes his determination based on religion but it seems more that it is his actual wants that rule his action. He may have been confused and disillusioned, but he did not want to die. Yet, with murder he was acting from his desire alone in spite of what religion dictates as right or wrong.
Religion dictates the action of the play in regard to what is convenient and what it is that Hamlet's emotion demands. Religion only becomes an excuse, which is quickly cast aside when his passions blaze.
Melanie Baca responding to Sarah’s post:
ReplyDeleteI’d like to agree with Sarah’s comment about the characters of Hamlet using religion as a justification for their actions, and the way they interpret religion however is most beneficial for their own motives. Hamlet decides against killing himself, as suicide would send his soul to hell, however killing Claudius is justified, as he is merely avenging his father (although, like Sarah said, revenge isn’t exactly condoned in the bible, either).
Hamlet’s father’s spirit tells him that he has to seek revenge on Claudius, but not to harm his mother because the heavens will take care of her. Technically, this could be said about anyone who did wrong, including Claudius. But as Claudius actually took the step to murder King Hamlet, whereas Gertrude is just an incestuous, seemingly power seeking queen, the late King Hamlet sees it as okay to leave her be. Also, when Hamlet decides to not kill Claudius when he is praying, for fear of sending his soul to heaven, he is basically allowing the events of the rest of the play to take place. Had he done it, the death of so many probably would not have occurred in the end.
Julia Rodriguez commenting on Natalia Sanchez Post:
ReplyDeleteI disagree with your assessment of act 1 scene 1, I felt that its purpose was not to clarify the setting of the story but rather establish a dark ghostly atmosphere that would foreshadow the rest of the play in contrast to act 1 scene 2 which is set in an exultant court of the recently crowned Claudius. Who’s disposition you described well. Claudius gives off a negative impression when he is able to grieve his dead brother yet move on and celebrate his marriage to Gertrude at the same time. I also agree with your analysis of Gertrude. “Either she is a heartless fool who has fallen for Claudius, or she’s a deceitful mastermind who played a role in the death of her ex-husband.” "Frailty, thy name is woman," Hamlet says. In my opinion because the character itself holds no substance it is hard for me to see Gertrude as a mastermind, but rather a pawn in this game. I found Hamlet’s soliloquy about suicide rather melodramatic because Hamlet’s characterization is that of inaction more so than the role of religion is keeping himself from committing such an act. This entire play revolves more around thought and inaction rather than action.
I agree with Cara in the belief that Ophelia is a contrast to Hamlet's opinion about women. Hamlet's belief that women are inherently sinful is diametrically opposed to her obvious innocence, especially when placed into the context of the corruption that is rapidly infecting Denmark. In fact, Ophelia is in a sense, the extreme opposite of Hamlet himself. She is, at least at the onset of the play, sane and levelheaded. She does not brood or remain fixated on one particular event like Hamlet. More importantly, however, she acts in the manner she is expected to, vastly contrasting Hamlet who despite the urging of his mother (from which he most likely derives his belief that all women are sinful) and his step father, does not act within the social norms that he should. The one feature that seems to make them compatible is the fact that they are at the mercy of their elders. Hamlet seeks revenge at the request of his father while Ophelia is generally reliant on here parent in general, not reciprocating Hamlets early advances because of Polonious. However, while the presence of an parent that Hamlet respects leads him to become increasingly insane, the lack of Ophelia's would most likely prove devastating, as she lacks the capacity to make her own decisions.
ReplyDeleteNatalia Sanchez commenting on Karyn's post:
ReplyDeleteKaryn pointed out the irony that results from Hamlet wanting to kill Claudius while having stopped himself from committing suicide because of religious beliefs. This is interesting because it shows how although people seem to understand the main concepts that religion puts across, such as suicide being a sin, there are things that can be personally interpreted as religiously correct or incorrect. Hamlet believes that the sin of Claudius killing his father will justify going after Claudius and killing him. Revenge would therefore make things "right" again. Even the ghost mentions that God will take care of Gertrude, implying that she will be punished by God. In this play, correcting sins seems to be a reasonable excuse under religious views for murder, vengeance, and punishment.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeletePriscilla Zecua answering the question:
ReplyDeleteWhat does Hamlet learn from the Ghost's speech?
While Hamlet speaks to this ghost Hamlet learns of the “true” cause for his father’s death. Claiming that it was an unnatural murder because it was a plotting by his brother, Hamlet’s uncle. The ghost also declares to Hamlet his duty to avenge his death or in this case his murder. To revenge, this bloody act, that was what Hamlet was commanded to do. What definitely stunned Hamlet was not only to know that his father had been murdered but also to know who was the one that did it. Everyone in Denmark believed that the king had died while sleeping in the orchard because he had been bitten by a snake but this was not so. Hamlet now knew that the murderer had been his uncle, the man who had just married his murder, and was wearing the crown. The ghost did warn Hamlet though, while planning his revenge towards Claudius he was not to hurt his mother. Even though she had changed pure, true love for a lustful almost incestuous relationship that was to be left to her conscious, and Hamlet was not to interfere with anything that had to do with her. Hamlet swore to obey the ghost and to bring retribution to his father.
Tallulah commenting on Esmeralda's post
ReplyDeleteI agree that the presence of the ghost is a signal that there is something rotten in Denmark. A hovering ghost is a sign of something not quite right, something off. The symbolism of a rotted human--a death, is a perfect metaphor for the undercurrent of ruin that is present in Denmark. This ghost is also foreshadowing the tragedy that will occur in the play. I believe the ghost too suggests the transfer of power the people are awaiting. A ghost is something in between alive and dead, it's not quite either. When there is a transfer of power, the people are in a state of being in between as well. Everything is wait and see, there is unfinished business.
Another reason the ghost is a strong symbol is that it also represents the overall indecision that Hamlet is famous for. As a ghost is, as stated, something between alive and dead, this signals Hamlet's decision in regard to suicide--"To be or not to be." Should he live or should he die. He opts to hover, as does the ghost.
Eric Hensley responding to the question:
ReplyDeleteWhat does Hamlet learn from the Ghost's speech?
From the Ghost's speech, Hamlet learns that his father, King Hamlet, had been poisoned by the current King Claudius. Claudius had stolen Gertrude from old Hamlet and while he was sitting in his orchard, poured "juice of cursed hebenon in a vial" into his ear, which killed him. With that single action he had taken the life, the crown and the Queen away from old Hamlet. The Ghost then goes on to ask Hamlet to avenge his death, but to not punish the Queen because and instead "leave her to heaven And to those thorns that in her bosom lodge to prick and sting her." Old Hamlet did not blame the Queen for going with Claudius because her lustful nature had taken her over and forced her to "prey on garbage." This then sets up the rest of the play, where Hamlet plans and carries out his revenge against Claudius for his father's untimely death.
In what ways is Scene II a contrast to Scene I? What do we learn about Gertrude, Claudius, and Hamlet in this scene?
ReplyDeleteThe first scene isn’t very optimistic because of the very beginning description of setting. Its setting is in a dark, cold night, which gives me hints that something bad will be happening. Soldiers guard the nation in the night and it seems that the nation is in preparation of attack from enemies, which adds tension to the play and also reveals that the people and government are in chaos. This is in contrast to the second scene in which it starts with the Claudius giving a charming and hopeful speech about the prosperity of the country. One thing both scenes have in common is they end giving you hints of whats to come, in Hamlets soliloquy he prophesises that the marriage of his Mother to his uncle will not end well,'It is not, nor it cannot come to good'
In scene two we start to learn a lot about the main characters we see that Hamlet is deeply depressed, because he wishes he could “melt, or even commit 'self-slaughter', because of his father’s death and how quickly his mother Gertrude moved on to marry Claudius. He has a dark view of the world and looks at females as weaklings “frailty thy name is women!” in Hamlets soliloquy we see his mental anguish over all the betrayal by his mother and Claudius to the late king. This scene sets the tone of Hamlets mentality. Claudius in scene 2 is seen as a man who could charm a crowed. He so eloquently went from talking about his grief over his brother’s death, to the marriage of his dead brothers wife and then about how great Denmark is. In the scene we learn that Claudius is nothing like the late king. Gertrude in this scene seems like a nice, caring mother, her actions don't give any clue that she is an evil character, nor will it actually ever be clear. she cares for her son Hamlet and wishes he would stay with her and Claudius. Reasons why there are doubts on her in this scene is because of the fact that she married so quickly to Claudius, after her husbands death.
--Post From My iPhone
Responding to Karyn's Post:
ReplyDeleteI agree with Karyn. Religion was the base for what was considered right and wrong. Like Karyn mentions, "An eye for an eye" explains Hamlet's justification for killing Claudius. Knowing that Claudius killed his father, Hamlet wanted to get revenge by having justice for his dad's death. And although it seems like religion prevented him from committing suicide, I believe the real reason he did not was because he understood he had a greater purpose. That's why I feel like his desire to revenge his father's death was greater than his desire to commit suicide because he was out on a mission-to rid the throne of a power hungry, ambitious king.
What does Hamlet learn from the Ghosts speech?
ReplyDeleteThe ghosts speech is what sets the tone for the play and gives the reader an idea of what is to come. In this scene Hamlet, Marcellus and Horatio are together to look for the ghost. When the ghost appears, it motions for Hamlet to follow. Hamlet decides that he is going to follow the ghost in hopes of finding out what the ghost wants to tell him. The ghost leads Hamlet off into the forest where he gives his speech. The ghost tells Hamlet about how he is going to have to return to the purgatory shortly so he doesn’t have much time. The ghost then tells Hamlet that he is the ghost of his father. Ultimately the ghost tells Hamlet that he was murdered and the being bitten by a poisonous snake was all a lie. It all happened when he was taking his nap. His brother Claudius poured poison in his ear. Hamlet is shocked to hear that his uncle, now the king, murdered his father. The ghost the proceeds to ask Hamlet to avenge him by killing Claudius. But the ghost insists that Hamlet should not harm his mother. Shortly after the ghost disappears. Hamlet is in an obvious state of shock and confusion. When he announces that he will kill Claudius to avenge his father. Once Horatio and Marcellus find Hamlet, they begin to ask what it was that the ghost wanted to tell him. Hamlet does not tell them what the ghost told him but he did make them promise to not speak of the incident again. This sets the tone for the play because the plot is now a plot of revenge. This scene causes the readers to have many questions, such as, why would Claudius kill his brother, and will Hamlet actually follow through with avenging his father. Also the reader might wonder if Hamlet will actually leave his mother out of this, or will he try to get back at her as well.
Eric commenting on Tallulah's post
ReplyDeleteI agree with all of Tallulah's ideas regarding the role of religion in Hamlet and the reason why religion was Hamlet's deciding factor against committing suicide. I really like how Shakespeare's style of writing really reflects the human thought process and the internal struggle constantly going on in our heads. In his soliloquy, Hamlet may appear to be seriously contemplating suicide, but perhaps this is really just the theatrical version of a quick series of thoughts that went through his head. In order for the audience to understand all of Hamlet's inner struggles, the soliloquies are very effective in communicating the feelings of the character at that moment. I think that Hamlet may have contemplated suicide very briefly, as just a short series of thoughts, and then decided it was ridiculous and added in the religion part to back himself up. Hamlet does not seem very religious at all and, as Tallulah says, only pulls it out when it is convenient.
I would have to agree with Cara when she stated that Ophelia's family only emphasizes the doubt on Hamlet's state of mind, produces further death of the main characters, and demonstrates Hamlet's loathe towards women. The hatred towards women probably began when his mother married his uncle proving that a “virtuous” woman could fall so easily to lust. This act from Hamlet's mother leads him to believe that all women are the same. Ophelia though proves that what Hamlet believes is not true because she is a very innocent, docile and chaste woman. Virtues that perhaps were the cause for him to fall in love with her to begin with.
ReplyDeleteIn response to Esmeralda’s post
ReplyDeleteI agree with Esmeralda on the idea that when it is said that something rotten is in Denmark it was referring to the ghost. This is because the ghost asked Hamlet to kill Claudius so that he could avenge his father. The presence of the ghost could have been a way to warn the people that something bad is to come. All of the people are awaiting the transfer of power, which is not a very stable situation. Also, the people loved Old Hamlet and already have a bad feeling due to the fact that he died. I also agree with Esmeralda’s idea that Scene II gives the reader a real reason to believe that the ghost is their to warn the people due to the fact that Fortinbras is seeking to gain land back that the old Hamlet had won from him.
Monica commenting on this question..
ReplyDelete-In what ways is Scene II a contrast to Scene I? What do we learn about Gertrude, Claudius, and Hamlet in this scene?
In Scene I, the setting takes place outside the castle of Elsinore in a secluded and dark area near the gates. It creates an eerie, suspenseful and creates the typical enviroment for something about to be foreshadowed about the near future. It is night time and the guards on duty are frightened by the ghost of the late King Hamlet. This scene introduces the events that have taken place such as a war about to take place soon and the recent death of the king.
In the second scene, taking place in the inside of the castle, the setting is more lively and colorful, filled with noise and celebration as oppose to the first scene which contrast the second dramtically. Gertrude, Claudius and Hamlet are introduced in this scene as well as details that are revealed. Gertrude and Claudius have been recently been married just after two months of her late husband, Hamlet's father. She marries Hamlet's uncle, and this creates much tension within the family. While everyone in the kingdom is happily celebrating the marriage and corontation of Claudius and Gertrude, Hamelet is enraged with his mother's reaction to the death. Instead of understanding what Hamlet is going through and consolting him, she rather tells him to move on and let it go. This rather odd behavior, raises the question of whether she was involved in the elimination of Hamlet's father or is she just simply a cold-hearted and indifferent woman? Claudius on the other hand, tries to put a good face to the public and Hamlet as a man doing things for the good of Denmark. He frowns upon Hamlet unable to let go of his father and tells him “‘tis unmanly grief" basically saying man up and stop grieving. This shows that Hamlet is rather distance from his parents and that thier relationship is rather like acquaintances than familiar. They keep him on "a short leash" as they prevent him from leaving Denmark, possibly as a reaction to his newly erratic behavior. Nonetheless, Hamlet and his parents have much tension throught this scene and Hamlet starts to question what has happened to humanity if no one grieves for the dead.
Responding to Elias Post:
ReplyDeleteI agree with what Elias had to say about what’s “rotten in the state of Denmark”. How the whole tension in the first scene reveals that the people and government are in chaos, and the sight of the late king-wearing armory is further giving the hint that something is wrong with the country. The country mourning of the late king is also a good reason why the Denmark is in a poor state. The whole first act is basically telling you that something is not right with the country.
--Post From My iPhone
commenting on Tallulah's post:
ReplyDeleteI agree with Tallulah's ideas regarding the role of religion in Hamlet. Although Hamlet does bring up the idea of suicide for a mere moment while contemplating what he should do next, I hardly believe that he would actually consider killing himself as a response to his father's death. I believe that Hamlet only brought it up as an idea of death leading to the idea of killing Claudius instead. In order for the audience to be able to relate to Hamlet's character, Shakespeare included many dialouges where Hamlet speaks to himself out loud of the thoughts trailing in his head in order to understand his thinking process. Religion was a safe card that Hamlet used to eliminate the idea of suicide and save him from being damned to hell and the ridiculous idea of killing himself. Yet, he doesn't consider religion and the sins that come from murdering and revenge.
Katie Jeffers answering..."What does Hamlet learn from the Ghost's speech?"
ReplyDeleteHamlet learns that his father did not die of natural causes but that his uncle, now the kings, killed his father. In poisoning King Hamlet Claudius managed to steal the crown, late Hamlet's wife, and young Hamlet's father. The ghost has come back to tell Hamlet of Claudias' actions so that Hamlet may avenge his dead father. When Hamlet asks of what punishment his mother should have the ghost simply says that Hamlet need not punish her for God will decide what is best for her. This leaves the reader wondering throughout the whole play if Gertrude was innocent or played a part in the murder of the late king. The speech from the Ghost of Hamlet sets up the rest of the play from this point on and helps to guide Hamlet in plotting his fathers revenge.
I also agree with what Elias said about the state of Denmark. The death of a ruler is always unsettling to the people of that country. People more than likely are suspicious as to whether or not they can trust Claudius and may even suspect foul play in the death of the late King Hamlet. Another reason Denmark is in such a foul state is that they fear they may be going to war soon which is adding tension and chaos to the appearance of the ghost of their late king.
ReplyDeleteKathryn Holmstrom responding to:
ReplyDeleteWhat does Hamlet learn from the Ghost's speech?
Hamlet learns not only the true circumstances of his father's death, but also realizes his own capacity for madness. The night before Hamlet goes to see the King's ghost, he says that if his father called him into Hell itself he would follow just to speak with him. This implies that Hamlet's insanity was growing long before he spoke to the ghost, even if he had not realized it yet. No doubt the cause would have been from his solitary grieving due to his mother's quick resolve to marry her brother-in-law. That alone would be enough for anyone to question their sense of reality; Everything he thought he had known about the world seemed to fall apart with his father's demise. The living people in his life had betrayed him, and therefore his father became his only link to the past. It is my view that because of this strong connection he felt for his father, he trusted and blindly accepted every word that fell from his lips. This is where he becomes mad with vengeance and resolves to kill his uncle, Claudius.
In response to Julia’s comment on Natalia’s post:
ReplyDeleteI think that you both are looking at two sides of the same coin with your ideas about the purpose of scene one. Natalia said that the first scene’s purpose was to “[clarify] the setting of the story of Hamlet” and that the second scene “introduces the main characters” and their views about the king’s death. As with any play (there could be plays that don’t do this, but I can’t think of any), the first scenes are crucial to the development of the characters, setting, and plot. Without at least some idea of these, the audience would probably get lost and lose interest, so it is important to at least establish the beginnings of a story early on. In keeping with this, the first scenes do in fact serve the purpose of “clarifying” (although a better word to use might be something along the lines of introducing) the setting.
Julia’s view that the first scene “[established] a dark ghostly atmosphere” is equally valid. A good play should have a well-established tone, as this helps the audience discern what attitude the playwright wants to portray. This goal is not separate and exclusive from establishing setting. The first scene in Hamlet achieves both goals. It sets the play so that the audience can better understand what is physically happening, and also establishes a somewhat otherworldly tone that continues to reappear throughout the play to help the audience grasp some of the important psychological plot that may not be completely clear based solely on the characters actions.
In short, the first scene does in fact establish the setting, but it also accomplishes the goal of setting the tone of the play.
Responding to the question: “In what ways is Scene II a contrast to Scene I? What do we learn about Gertrude, Claudius, and Hamlet in this scene?”
ReplyDeleteScene one sets up a very dark and otherworldly mood. It establishes that the country of Denmark is not in the best shape at the moment due to the recent death of the king. The king’s death is the cause of the conflict in the play. More specifically, when Hamlet discovers that his father was murdered by Claudius, he swears to get revenge, which becomes the major plot point.
The gravity of the situation as described in the first scene creates a clear contrast with the gaiety and celebration of the second scene. Despite the fact that his brother’s body is still fresh in the ground, Claudius shows only a superficial display of grief and urges everyone to just move on. His actions, marrying the queen with such good cheer so shortly after the king’s death, cause a great deal of tension between himself and Hamlet, who still grieves for his father.
As the scene progresses, Claudius and Gertrude try to convince Hamlet that his grief is pointless and that he should look to the future instead of becoming lost in the past. This interaction helps develop the personality of all three characters. It shows Claudius’ lack of sorrow over his brother’s death (which starts Hamlet’s suspicion about Claudius’ involvement in the death of King Hamlet). Hamlet, on the other hand, is shown to be extremely sorrowful over the death. Gertrude doesn’t seem to have very strong feelings one way or the other. She seems like a somewhat shallow character that simply follows where she is led. Her marriage to Claudius relieves her of most of the duties of being the ruler of Denmark, so she goes with it, following the path of least resistance. I don’t agree with the views that she either had a hand in King Hamlet’s murder or was a heartless woman. I think she was just trying to make life easier on herself by letting someone else take charge.
Hamlet first learns for sure that the ghost is his father’s spirit, not just a speculation from a few guards and that he is for sure dead and banished to hell for all of his wrongdoings. He is also not allowed to speak of his resting place and if he were it would destroy Hamlet’s fragility. The ghost tells Hamlet to avenge his death because he had a “foul and most unnatural murder.” Aside from Hamlet, the audience discovers what the “official” death of his father was, that he was bitten be a snake in an orchard. However, the ghost tells Hamlet that said serpent now wears the crown, meaning that the current king (Hamlet’s uncle), is the one who murdered him and then the ghost confirms this in more specific terms. In this monologue Hamlet discovers the infamous (and ridiculous) murder by ear poisoning. The ghost calls the new King and Queen incestuous and commands Hamlet to “let not the royal bed... be a couch for... incest,” and to kill the King, but leave his mother alone so that the guilt can “prick and sting her.”
ReplyDeleteJustin commenting on Nathan’s post...
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with Nathan’s post because obviously something is amiss in the state of Denmark because the mood of the opening scene right off the bat is completely eerie and not inviting. It tells us that the guard post is unsettling because of the actions and tenseness of the guards. I also think that the ghost is the best way to tell that Denmark is in great unrest because his presence. According to Shakespeare’s ideas about ghosts it is still on earth because of some loose ends that need to be fixed. We learn that this is correct in the scene five because of the ghost’s monologue directed towards Hamlet.
What is "rotten in the state of Denmark," as Marcellus tells us? What do we learn about the situation in Scene I? In Scene II?
ReplyDeleteThe line "rotten in the state of Denmark" is used to describe corruption or a situation in which something is wrong. In Scene 1, it is evident that there are many things going wrong in the state of Denmark. King Hamlet has died which has left the country in a state of distress and the two guards at the front have witnessed the King's appearance as a ghost. These two factors alone create a tone of somberness and eeriness to the play from the very beginning which relate to why Denmark is considered to be in a rotten state.
In Scene 2, the definition of this quote is completely apparent because of the corruption in the marriage between Claudius and Gertrude. Only a few months after King Hamlet's death, his wife goes on to marry her dead husband's own brother, Claudius. That in itself is a scandal which brings distress to Hamelet and further leads them down the path of a corrupted family. It is also in this scene that Denmark learns that they may have to go to war with Fortinbras and his army if they do not give up the land they had taken from them.
All in all, at this point in the play, Denmark is in a very rotten state which is portrayed in all the different elements mentioned.
Vanesa Sierra commenting on Elizabeth Krueger's post:
ReplyDeleteI think Elizabeth answers the question right on the spot. The mood created in Scene 1 due to King Hamlet’s death is very much a “dark and otherworldly mood.” This introduction is merely setting up the scene for the rest of the play; that scene being one of death, corruption, and drama. The foreshadowing of the climax of the story is portrayed in these two scenes when Hamlet vows to kill Claudius. Also, interaction between the Gertrude, Claudius, and Hamlet can be easily judged as peculiar, considering that Gertrude married her dead husband’s brother a few months after his death (who is somewhat crazy) and she has a son that has “gone mad.” What Elizabeth says about Gertrude just wanting to follow someone who will just lead her seems very accurate to how Gertrude really is. I as well do not believe that Gertrude was a heartless woman and just forgot all about her husband after his death, rather, I think she just wanted to do anything that would give her an easy life and that’s exactly what she did when she married Claudius. A lot of the story line is learned through these two acts.
"Something is rotten in the state of Denmark," hold an omniscient foreshadowing tone. Scene one establishes the death of the King of Denmark. The usage of the word state denotes conflict within the top political hierarchy of Denmark. The ghost of the late Hamlet furthers the foreboding atmosphere the play will take. The quote also relates to Claudius’s legitimacy. Morally, his marriage to Gertrude, so soon after his brother’s death, continues the point that something is morally eschew. Early in Scene two, Claudius’s discussion of possible war suggest something greater is amiss. Hamlet’s line in Scene Two “Ay, madam, it is common,” in reference to his mother’s comment that death is a regular occurrence, is spoken in sharp wits. This implies he does not believe his father’s death to be of the natural kind, which while true, will lead to the eventual deaths of many characters. The “unweeded garden” of Denmark has begun to impose itself on its citizen, mainly the mind of Hamlet.
ReplyDeleteAngie on Tallulah's Post
ReplyDeleteWhile I agree with Tallulah on the duality behind Hamlet’s twisting of scripture, I believe it is for his own purpose. As one of Shakespeare most aware characters (almost to the point of delirium), Hamlet does know what he wants but is mentally tormented by the integrity of his wishes. Religion is used as an excuse and not means o redemption. While tortured by his family’s strange predicament, suicide places him in the realm of inaction- which is what Hamlet is really contemplating. I agree that Hamlet seems to live in the moment, often excusing himself from the damnation murder brings, while openly applying it to others. His willingness to murder shows his lack of respect for religion, but high regard for his personal wants. He seems to place his idea of justice above that of God’s. If Hamlet really believed in religion, he would save himself from hell by letting Claudius be punished on Judgment day by God, not a mere man. Through this religion is seen as an opportune scapegoat, forgotten when convenient.
Emily response to “What does Hamlet learn from the Ghost's speech?”
ReplyDeleteHamlet learns a few things from the ghost’s speech, first of all that his appearance isn’t a product of anyone’s imagination, second that the ghost is the ghost of his father. But most importantly he learns that the cause of his father’s death was not what everyone thought, instead he learns that his father had been murdered and by his own brother Polonius. This is of great importance to the play because it creates the base of the oncoming events and most importantly it initiates Hamlets thirst for revenge. The ghost tells Hamlet to avenge his unnatural death by killing the king but leaving his mother alone to suffer the death of his “incestuous” husband.
Emily responding to Natalia:
ReplyDeleteI agree with the purpose that the 1st two scenes serve, that Scene I clarifies the setting of the story of Hamlet and that scene II introduces the main characters and their present attitudes now that the king is dead but don’t forget that it also sets up the emotional atmosphere (for a lack of a better word) that will show the tension between main characters of the play. I also agree with your analysis of Gertrude of how she is both heartless and deceitful or a heartless-in-love fool.
When the ghost of King Hamlet visits young Hamlet, he tells Hamlet of the circumstances of his death. He tells him that he was murdered by his uncle Claudius with the help of his mother Gertrude. Along with this, the Ghost's speech most importantly allows Hamlet to realize that his life now has a purpose and that he can finally do something important.
ReplyDeleteBefore he was visited by the Ghost, Hamlet was merely sulking about mourning the loss of his father and hating the new marriage between his mother and his uncle. If anything, at the beginning of the tale, Hamlet might be seen as the antagonist because he seemed to be the one person in Denmark who refused to allow anything happy to occur. While many people began to wear their regular festive and bright clothing, Hamlet already had the black clothing that he would be wearing two weeks in advanced. Maybe, this is why William Shakespeare allowed for the Ghost to arrive so soon in the tale, he didn't want to allow any audience members to take the side of Claudius and grow resentment for Hamlet. If Shakespeare had written for the Ghost to appear a moment later, the character of Hamlet would have lost all credibility and the tale would not have been as profound and as wonderful as it is now. But since Shakespeare was a genius, he wrote for the Ghost to visit at the perfect moment. After Hamlet was given the task to avenge his father, he became consumed with it and now had a concrete reason for being the way was and acting the way he did.
Response to Genesis:
ReplyDeleteI totally agree with you when it comes to how much Shakespeare used foreshadowing in the first scene. From past readings of his works, it seems as if he uses foreshadowing in all of his works to captivate his audience. So maybe, back in the day, this was a type of marketing... immediately immerse the audience into your play and make them feel as if they have to stay and watch the whole show in order to learn the answers to all of the questions they might have in Scene 1.
I also agree with how Shakespeare uses Act 2 to fully introduce all of the characters in the play and allow the audience to have a better understanding. One thing that your post sparked in me, however, was when you talked about how it seemed fishy for Gertrude to get remarried so quickly. I can't help but ask "why" whenever I read scenes in which gertrude is present. For example, no one ever suspects Gertrude for anything. Not when she married Hamlets uncle and not after Polonius was found dead in her room. In a way, this lack of suspicion allows for the audience to further analyze the role of women in Shakespeare's plays. They perform retched acts and they may receive consequences, but they are normally brought on by fate and not by fellow man.