The Imprisoned Hamlet

Prisons are like hospitals: they help cure patients to give them a second chance in life (although some might take longer than others). Just like our former president said, "America is the land of the second chance - and when the gates of the prison open, the path ahead should lead to a better life." Prisons should be seen less as punishment and more as nourishment. That's why the acting of Hamlet in the prison was not only a great idea to help educate prisoners, but also a great way to reflect and learn from their mistakes by identifying with the characters of the play.

People would expect prisoners to be uneducated, illiterate murderers who are not willing to learn from their mistakes. Well, they could see us as privileged, ignorant people who are not willing to trust in them to be better people. That is our first problem in helping the prisoners. That's why the acting of Hamlet was brilliant. most of the actors were uneducated and there may have been a few problems in understanding the happenings of the play. But who knows, in the end, the prisoners might have understood better than others since they could have actually related Hamlet's (or any other character's) actions with their own. Their personal experiences were shown on stage.

One key concept of Hamlet is if the end justifies the means. Acting out the play, the prisoners were able to see the insanity of Hamlet bringing about tragic events and all the consequences for them. Like a domino effect, one tragic event causes another, and that one causes yet a worse one. Because of all the anxiety, anger and frustration builds up, Hamlet is unable to kill himself even if he wants to because he doesn't want to end up being like the unsatisfied spirit of his father that roams around Earth. Just like Hamlet's constraint, the prisoners are trapped in prison. And just like Hamlet growing insane and crazy, many people in prison could also lose sense of control over themselves. But, the third-person view of themselves through the play allowed the prisoners to realize many things that they hadn't realized before.

Just because someone is locked up in a prison doesn't mean that he/she is not a human. In fact, everyone lives in a sort of prison, just that some are bigger than others. Many people spend their whole lives living only in their own country, or even only in their own city. Prisoners spend their lives in prison. The only difference between the two is that one knows his/her limits while the other doesn't. Prisoners still have thoughts and feelings. They can still learn and educate their minds like us.

Fear of Being Fearful

Ghosts are like trials: they are innocent until proven guilty. And, once proven “guilty”, there is no going back. They are non-existent (innocent) until seen with one’s own eyes (guilty). Once they are seen, they cannot be unseen.

People have a tendency to pretend and even convince themselves to not believe in superstition. They are afraid that ghosts might actually exist. But, Hamlet views this aspect in a very different angle. When he sees the ghost of his dead father, he doesn't show any fear. At least, not the one that most people would feel. Instead of avoiding it and running away for sweet life, he runs towards it and starts to have a dialogue with it. It asks him to avenge his father's death by killing the murder, his uncle. Acting like the spirit's sycophant, Hamlet obsequiously tries to obey its orders. We can clearly see some kind of fear towards the spirit through his actions, but it's not because of the fear of death like normal people. He acts pretty normal about the existence of the ghost. In fact, he wants to voluntarily kill himself to have "freedom from the world" according to Northrop Frye. Frye believes that this strange fear for the ghost that Hamlet develops is actually "the fear that he might become just another such ghost." He's not afraid of the actual ghost, but of the possibility of becoming one once he is dead.

Whether you're Hamlet or an ordinary person portrayed in a typical Hollywood horror/ghost movie, the only conclusion I can come up with is that the appearances of ghosts, or any other supernatural event, will one way or another make you crazy and insane.

Hamlet Freud

I've come to notice throughout the past few weeks that psychology is one of the only subjects that can relate with almost any other subject. Even in literature.

In The interpretation of Dreams, Sigmund Freud analyzes one of the greatest creations of tragic poetry, Shakespeare's Hamlet. Using the powers of psychology, Freud tries to understand Hamlet's behavior, even by relating it to the Oedipus Complex. He says that "Hamlet represents the type of man whose power of direct action is paralysed by an excessive development of his intellect." Long story short, he tells us that Hamlet can't get much done because he over thinks too much. Ironically, he implies it's a bad thing to do even though it's exactly what he does to be able to analyze and interpret the mind of Hamlet. He creates a paradox just as Hamlet does. In a way, Freud and Hamlet share parallel traits. In fact, it sometimes feels like Freud is only just analyzing himself. But, it would make sense of course, since psychology is based on the study of the behavior of human beings as a whole rather than the study of each individual being.



But just like Hamlet, there is one thing that Freud didn't really understand. After close examination he did find a logical reasoning in explaining the unusual crazy behaviors of Hamlet. I mean, it's natural for humans to feel that way when they are in the same situation as Hamlet. As a matter of fact, the crazy, yet intelligent, character of Hamlet actually seems to be a reflection and representation of the mind and feelings of Shakepeare since it was written immediately after his father's death. Furthermore, his son who died at an early age was named Hamnet (which really closely resembles the name Hamlet). But, Freud, the all-so-intelligent philosopher that impacted the world, had one thing that he couldn't quite grasp that Hamlet (nor Shakespeare) couldn't either. Freud once said, "the great question that has never been answered, and which I have not yet been able to answer, despite my thirty years of research into the feminine soul, is 'What does a woman want?'”


...Yes, not even the most intelligent people in the world could answer that after all these years of existing on Earth. One of Hamlet's source of insanity comes from the disappointing behavior and actions of his mom. After the king's death, Hamlet's mom goes off to marry her supposedly beloved dead husband's brother. Not even the great power of psychology can explain that.

Anyway, besides that, we can trust Freud on the understanding of Hamlet's mind. His analysis might even be the most accurate one compared to all the others. After all, Freud easily empathizes with Hamlet, unlike most people who tend to feel sympathy instead.

Sidenotes

I found some sites that may be irrelevant to many, but still decided to post them up for personal reasons. So, here they are. The first one is a scene-by-scene summary of the Hamlet and the basic analysis of its general themes. The second one is an explanation of all (or at least most of) the puns and paradoxes within the play. Enjoy.

http://www.pathguy.com/hamlet.htm

http://www.shakespeare-navigators.com/hamlet/Pap.html

Hamlet: Entire Play

http://shakespeare.mit.edu/hamlet/full.html

An Obscure Window to the Prince's Past

Have you ever heard of a tale about an unfortunate prince whose uncle takes his dead (murdered) father's throne and marries his mother? No, it's not Prince Charming. This one's a bit more tragic: eight people, including the main character, end up dying in the course of the story. Although the story plot may seem a bit harsh or boring at times, the author's dynamic usage of literary devices keeps the reader entertained and puzzles the minds of many. Yes, it's the one and only play that we all know of: Shakespeare's Hamlet.
What makes this play so interesting is the surplus amount of different aspects and personalities that the main character, Hamlet, has. In one of the scenes, Hamlet goes through six different states of minds in only one soliloquy. Hamlet's indecisive personality is exceedingly diverse that even Johann Wolfgang Von Goethe, a great actor who once took Hamlet's role while presenting the play, had problems fully analyzing him.

For the most part, I do agree with Goethe's analysis on Hamlet. But, the strategy he used seems to be a bit ambiguous and inaccurate. He first tried to characterize how Hamlet was before the king's death (before the beginning of the play) by using small hints scattered all around the whole book. He then stepped in the shoes of the made-up "past Hamlet" and tried to imagine what it would feel like to be in his situation. Then, he assumed that Hamlet would have probably felt the same way as he did. This strategy might seem ingenious, and I have to admit, it was a pretty clever idea, but the hints shown in the play about Hamlet's past personality is minimal. In fact, one can argue that his multiple-sided personality was exactly the same before his father's death. There are many scenes that show the reader that Hamlet doesn't actually feel much of anything, but is rather smart in getting what he wants Furthermore, Goethe, ironically, contradicts his own method of using Hamlet's past to develop his character. He stated, "his past condition he remembers as a vanished dream."
He just implied that Hamlet's past has nothing to do with his present condition and yet, he tries to use little insinuations about the past to determine the peculiar idiosyncrasies of the character.

Sounds like a hypocrite to me. But who knows, maybe Goethe is following Shakespeare's guidelines of literary devices and using irony himself to interpret Hamlet's feelings. He just doesn't know it.

Darcy and Elizabeth

Yes! I finally finished the book! The final chapters went by a bit slowly. The ending was slightly (if not, very) predictable, but it was enjoyable since it at least had some kind of a moral teaching (unlike modern-day chick flicks).

After all the problems between Lydia and Wickham, Darcy’s proposal towards Elizabeth seems unexpected and improbable among the characters. However, after the two marriages in a row (Lydia/Wickham and Bingley/Jane) and the general flow of the book, the reader can suspect the upcoming marriage.
This also coincides with the earlier foreshadowing, in which Elizabeth stated that Darcy’s house was “a large, handsome stone building, standing well on rising ground, and backed by a ridge of high woody hills; and in front, a stream of some natural importance was swelled into greater, but without any artificial appearance. Its banks were neither formal nor falsely adorned. Elizabeth was delighted. She had never seen a place for which nature had done more, or where natural beauty had been so little counteracted by an awkward taste.” Maybe we, as readers, always knew, in a small part of the brain, how the book was going to end from an earlier portion of the book.

In the end, it wasn’t really about business as it was in the beginning. In the beginning, it was about the money, the wealth and the social class. However, it seemed that these things did not matter (as much) by the conclusion of the book. True love actually blossomed after all the events took place. Only after Dancy overcame his pride and Elizabeth her prejudice was the true love possible. In other words, the title of this book could as well have been ‘Dancy and Elizabeth’.

Character Chart of Pride and Prejudice

Overgeneralizations

I don't know about many of the other boys (actually, I think I do), but I personally don't really like chick flicks. Unluckily, I can't help but notice that Pride and Prejudice is a perfect example of one.

After rejecting Mr. Collin's marriage proposal, Elizabeth is faced with her next problem. Darcy, who had had an infatuation towards Elizabeth for a long time, finally asks her to marry him. But yet again, Elizabeth denies, unsurprisingly because of her disgust and hatred toward him. Choosing not to give up, Darcy gives her a letter the next day to clarify a few things. In the letter, he does accept that the failure of the relationship between Bingley and Jane was his fault. But then, he tells her one little fact that would change the rest of the novel: Wickham had tried to obtain the love of Darcy's sister, Georgiana, for wealth. I would say that this is the true climax of the whole novel. Elizabeth, who had initially been attracted to Wickham and had thought of Darcy as arrogant, starts to view Wickham differently and develops a sort of pity for Darcy. Somehow, this pity gradually grows into maturity, and Elizabeth decides to reconsider Darcy. Eventually, this reconsideration would turn into love.



I'd say that it's a bit unrealistic that a girl would suddenly start loving someone she used to hate just because of a letter that he had sent. In fact, it's unrealistic in the first place that an arrogant and stubborn guy like Darcy would have given a letter like that face-to-face the day after that same person had rejected his proposal. But then, what would chick flicks be if it weren't for their fanciful romances and improbable love stories. The only thing that this story is missing is Darcy bringing roses every day to Elizabeth. However, I think that the main reason for Austen's writing about all this change in perspective inside Elizabeth's head is to show that first impressions are usually inaccurate and that they do not reflect the heart of the actual person. In other words, prejudice is not a good thing because it only mirrors superficiality. I suppose I agree with Austen, but I don't think it changes much of reality. It is in human nature to make first judgments. Whether someone is more sympathetic than other people or not, first judgments will always affect, at least a little bit, on the attitude that the person has on others. I'd say that it's better for us to try to change our superficiality to match with our inside than to try to change other people to not base their attitudes on first impressions.

Intense Marital Issues

On my previous blog, I said that Mrs. Bennet from Pride and Prejudice is very intense about obtaining spouses for her kids probably just because she is the mother of five unmarried daughters. But, I was wrong. After reading a few more chapters of the book, I realized that even young men could also be very needy for wives, not for their children like Mrs. Bennet's case, but for themselves.

Surprisingly, Mr. Collins comes up to Elizabeth one day and proposes to her for a marriage. Mrs. Bennet, being her usual self, wants her to accept the offer. Even though her own mom tells her that she wouldn't see her again if she were to reject Mr. Collins, Elizabeth still denies the proposal. Only after a while does Mr. Collins propose to Charlotte, Elizabeth's best friend. Unlike Elizabeth and her personality, she accepts. Mrs. Bennet, obviously, gets infuriated at this her daughter just lost a possible husband.

Who seems to be more intense, Mrs. Bennet or Mr. Collins (and when I say intense, I mean needing to marry someone just to feel secure and not taking much of love into account)? At first sight, one would say Mrs. Bennet. But, I disagree. If I really I had to pick, I'd pick Mr. Collins.

It is natural for a woman like Mrs. Bennet with five unmarried daughters to tend to worry about these factors. The success of her kids is the central focus of her life. Yes, she might cross the line at times, but that is more due to her personality. Mr. Bennet would probably worry about this too, but he has his rational thinking a bit straighter and doesn't care as much as she.

On the other hand, there's Mr. Collins. A gentleman like him could be focusing more on other things like stability of his wealth or family relations. But, no. He chooses to spend his valuable time looking for a wife. His actions would be clearly justifiable if he wanted to spend what is left of his life with someone that he loved and that loved him back. However, this is not the case. After getting rejected by Elizabeth, he just goes on to the next woman he finds and proposes to her. One would argue that his reason was that he didn't want to be alone throughout the future years, but I'd personally want to live with my family or friend than to live with someone I don't truly love. One could also argue that his reason is his desire to have a family (children) to carry on his bloodline (or something of the sort). Either way, he's treating marriage more like a business and using it as a tool to feel secure. Love is discarded.

I guess, in a way, Mr. Collins represents the impact that societal norms and loneliness have on single men and their feelings of desperation effected by them, just like Mrs. Bennet's exaggerated representation of the anxiety that women might carry around. Still, people today usually don't act like this. But who am I to judge? There might be a Mr. Collins or a Mrs. Bennet in all of us, whether it be written all over our actions, or hidden somewhere deep beneath a dark hole. It's still there.

Noteworthy Dazzling Words!

1. apothecary: a person who prepared and sold medicines and drugs.

2. efficacy: the ability to produce a desired or intended result.

3. rapture: a feeling of intense pleasure or joy.

4. deference: humble submission and respect.

5. gallantry: courageous behavior.

6. impertinence: not showing proper respect; rude.

7. threadbare: (of cloth, clothing, or soft furnishings) becoming thin and tattered with age.

8. flog: beat (someone) with a whip or stick as punishment or torture.

9. iniquitous: immoral or grossly unfair behavior.

10. asperity: : he pointed this.

11. rector: (in the Roman Catholic Church) a priest in charge of a church or of a religious institution.

12. thither: to or toward that place.

Balls and Roses

I know that the story takes place in the 18th century and all, but Pride and Prejudice can't emphasize more on the balls (dance parties) and all the so-called romance that happens between the characters.

Yes, I think I sort of get the balls part. Back then, balls were very formal and fancy-looking. Only high class people (or at least not the poor people) were able to attend them. It is understandable that rich people wanted to mingle with other rich people, because they wanted to always keep their status of being at the top of the food chain (economically of course). And yes, the parties today are very different. But, it makes sense that the continuous changes in culture and even things like technology have affected our perspective of a party. What doesn't really make sense to me is the perspective of love in the 18th century according to the book.

It might seem that there is no difference between modern-day love and the one showed in the story. Both of them show some kind of desire for another person. But, in the novel, love is actually shown more like a business rather than a feeling and emotion for others. Mrs. Bennet, the mother of Elizabeth and Jane, always looks so needy to obtain husbands for her daughters. Obviously most mothers would want their daughters to get married at some point, but Mrs. Bennet has her life revolve around it. This makes her daughters perceive love as a desire for a person based on his or her wealth and social class. This actually still goes on nowadays even though it's not very well-tolerated, but the social environment within the story makes it seem so normal and very common.

I guess, in a way, Mrs. Bennet's attitude represents an exaggerated form of women's inclination to base their love on the person's affluence. Whether it be modern day or two centuries ago, that fact, or more correctly worded as a bias, will never change.

Pride?

Does pride actually exist or is it just an illusion that restrains us from doing something we shouldn't be doing and feel good about it? Of course, no one would be willing to run around naked on the streets while screaming at the top of his/her lungs, but that's because no one wants to, not because of pride. Even the book of Pride and Prejudice itself shows this.

In the beginning of the novel, a rich man called Mr. Bingley moves into town. The Bennet's, hearing this news, gets excited and sees it as an opportunity for a future husband for one of the single daughters in the family. Although there are five daughters, Mr Bingley prefers the oldest daughter, Jane, and even dances with her twice during a ball.

The five Bennet sisters clearly don't have any pride for themselves. They immediately took action to try to gain a relationship with Mr. Bingley after finding out about his great wealth. However, let's suppose, for instance, that these sisters had this so-called pride. Then, they technically would have restrained themselves from trying to get close to Mr. Bingley and kept on living their usual lives hoping for a prince-charming to magically appear some day. But, would this alter the fact that the sisters still wanted to have husbands with a lot of money and wealth, just like Mr. Bingley? Probably not.

The point I'm trying to make here is that someone's behavior and actions does not always reflect the person's thinking, because deep down, it's always just a matter of fact of whether the person likes something or not. This superficial illusion humans tend to call "pride" is just a cover up that hides one's shameful desires and feel good (proud) about it.

Buddy's Day

It seems like Buddy, just like any other guy, wasn't really satisfied with his life. Ondaatje describes Bolden's daily routines:

"It was a financial tragedy that sleep sobered Bolden up completely, that his mind on waking was clear as an empty road and he began to casually drink again although never hard now for he played in the evenings. He slept from 4 till 8. His day had begun at 7 when he walked the kids a mile to school buying them breakfast along the way at the fruit stands. A half hour's walk and another 30 minutes for them to sit on the embankment and eat the huge meal of fruit." (177)

First of all, Bolden worked as a barber after left his kids at school until his nap at four. His life seems to be very decent, but his "financial tragedy" of spending his money on alcohol implies his wanting to forget reality. Even his everlasting 4-hour nap shows signs of dissatisfaction of the world. And once he does finally wake up, he goes out in the evening to let out all his emotions by playing his cornet. Obviously, he doesn't seem to like his job as a barber much because it's not even mentioned in this passage about his daily routine. Yes, it feels like as if Bolden is some kind of an emo that hates his job, but no. As we keep reading, it can be noticed that the second half of this paragraph is dedicated to his lovely kids. Clearly, Bolden values his kids with great importance. I don't know about other people, but in my personal opinion, waking up every day before seven just to spend about two hours walking a mile and buying food for someone else is not a very easy task. But, "his day had begun at 7" tells us that Bolden thought of his morning with his children as something positive, something that sparked up his will to keep up and survive throughout the day. Of course, Bolden's current anxiety slowly keeps on building up throughout the novel which probably is the reason he eventually leads to his insanity, but for now, he still has at least a bit of hope, not to live, but to survive.

Reading Through Bolden

After reading Coming Through Slaughter by Michael Ondaatje, I've decided to do a close reading. Here's a quote taken from the book, in which Bolden, the main character, meets up again with Nora, his wife he had left for two years:

"They lay there without words. Moving all over her chest and arms and armpits and stomach as if placing mines on her with his mouth and then leaned up and looked at her body glistening with his own spit. Together closing up her skirt, slipping the buttons back into their holes so she was dressed again. Not going further because it was friendship that had to be guarded, that they both wanted. The diamond had to love the earth it passed along the way, every speck and angle of the other’s history, for the diamond had been the earth too.” (118)

Sentence one: "They" (more than one person), including Buddy, have some kind of an ineffable emotion going on inside them.

Sentence two: Through the actions he does and the way that he appreciates every part of her body implies that he likes her (or at least he's about to have a sexual relationship). But because Buddy leaned up and stares at what's happening ("looked at her body glistening with his own spit"), I can infer that he's rethinking his actions.

Sentence three: Buddy stops what he's doing. I can infer that he is at least thinking about his actions and has a sense of why he shouldn't do what he was about to do. His stopping also implies that Buddy now either has more respect or his interest in Nora (or woman in general) has decreased.

Sentence four: Buddy has to keep his friendship with Nora the way it is either because of some kind of a past experience or because of some kind of a constraint. "...that they both wanted" implies that Nora understands Buddy's situation and feelings. I can infer that Buddy realizes that it's not worth risking his relationship with Nora.

Sentence five: Even though Bolden has now changed a lot compared to his previous years, he realizes that he was still a part of Nora, who has not changed much. He bases his actions on the past and decides that he has to respect his wife.