Apr 28 2009


Four down, One to Go

Filed under Uncategorized

Wow! After reading Act V in Hamlet, I was a little suprised at how fast Shakespeare summed up the deaths a wopping five people…in 2 pages! And….only one is intentional.  Ophelia accidently drinks from a poisoned cup that the King had meant for Hamlet, and dies. Laertes, by chance, knicks Hamlet with a poisoned  fencing sword, but then bit the dust after Hamlet stole his sword and knicked Laertes. While, they are dying, Hamlet stabs the King to death, and thus this is the only intentional, blatent murder, which oddly came out of chaos. I am a little saddened that the Queen died because, yes she married her dead husband’s brother, but I truly think she never new that Claudius killed him. At the end of Act III, when Polonius has just died, Hamlet yells, “A bloody deed–almost as bad, good mother, As kill a king, and marry with his brother” (Act III, Scene 4, Lines 29-30), but Gertrude next replies, “As kill a king?”. She is truly surprised that Hamlet said this, and does not understand why he would. When she died, I felt bad because she wasn’t as guilty as everyone thought.

 

I would also like to comment on the moments leading up to Laertes’ and Hamlet’s deaths. Hamlet is winning the fencing round, having touched Laertes twice, and Hamlet having no touches by Laertes. The reader for a couple seconds gets excited, and thinks, “ok, yea, so this is going to be fine. Hamlet will win, Denmark with be saved!”. And then of course, as Bill liked it, Hamlet, in the blink of an eye, gets touched by the sword of death. And before we know it, we have a room full of dead corpses…and Horatio is left to relfect on all of the intentional and accidental chaos that went into the destruction of the Danish royal family.

 

Furthermore, I would like to say a little something about a theme in this play. I absolutely loved the theme of insanity, and having to guess whether Hamlet was acting or really was going insane. It makes you think about that fine line there is between reality and imaginary, between paranoia and mental security. I think that if Hamlet had more people he could trust and confide in, his risk for going crazy would have been reduced. Losing Ophelia first to the King’s side, and then to her suicide really sent him over the edge. This play really shows the importance of trust, and stable friendships, and their effects to a person’s mental state. Those feelings and connections are the only thing, in this case, keeping a person sane. And once Hamlet lost friends to the King, and his ability to connect with people, he crossed the divide, and entered into the land of insanity. This, I would say, is the true unknown country because there is no going back, and nothing can predict the future.

3 responses so far

Apr 26 2009


Two Fathers, Two Sons, To Revenge

Filed under Uncategorized

First, an update on my predictions: As I predicted, Ophelia died. Leartes has now sworn to take revenge on Hamlet, who I’m sure will die.

Second, my title. Play on Words. Two and To. Too Great. Ha, I did it again.

For this entry, I would like to foil Laertes and Hamlet. In your introduction to Hamlet, Mrs. Hazle, you drew three family trees on the board (Hamlet’s, Laertes’, and Fortinbras’). You said that they would make for some interesting foils, and you were right. Hamlet and Laertes both have dead father’s now, and both carry feelings of revenge. However, there are crucial differences to their reactions. Hamlet, who thinks it is a curse from the very beginning that he should be born to take revenge on his father, choses to do this slowly, and secretly. This eventually drives him insane, with the secrecy, the lies, and having no one to trust. However, Laertes, once having heard of his father’s murder, immediately returns from France, to set right what Denmark (or rather Denmark’s King) has done wrong. Thinking everything is Claudius’ fault, he storms into the castle (a yelling mob of devout followers behind him) and demands that Claudius answers for his wrong-doings. Of course, we know that it was Hamlet is to blame for the particular murder of Polonius (but hey, it might as well be Dane Claudius, he caused Denmark to fall into royal chaos). Laertes has all the force, and some might say, bravery, that Hamlet does not have.

To some extent, I believe that Hamlet realizes that he has gone about his revenge all wrong. After a chance meeting with Captain Fortinbras between Norway and Poland, he swears to himself that his “thoughts will be of blood” from now on, meaning that he will delay no more in his murder of Claudius. However, I do doubt this a little because Hamlet’s thoughts have been blood ever since his encounter with his dead father’s ghost. Hamlet seems to only re-declare that he will kill the King. This makes me think that maybe Hamlet lacks the will or force to actually committ the deed.

2 responses so far

Apr 25 2009


Reality Check Anyone?

Filed under Uncategorized

Quick update on my predictions: Earlier I had predicted that after witnessing the King’s reaction to the play within a play, Hamlet would do something crazy. Turns out, I was right! Hamlet hath slain Polonius.

Since I am doing this post after I saw Act III in the movie, I want to elaborate on the scene with Hamlet and Ophelia (Scene 1). In the play, I pictured the two characters having an intense conversation, biting and with great tension, but not as I saw in the movie. However, I do think that the movie plays off of Hamlet’s dramatic realization that he has indeed “lost” Ophelia to the “other side” (to the King). Before Act III, all he knows is that Polonius has denied her access to him. However, in the beginning of their confrontation, it becomes clear that Ophelia, although she feels bad, wants to also break the tie she still has with him. She attemts to give back “remembrances that she has long longed to rediliver” to Hamlet. Hamlet sees this as a “I put your things in a box and am giving them back to you now” message. He sees now that they are finally done. This feeling is even more strengthened when he hears the “thud” coming from somewhere in the room. He automatically becomes suspicious of Ophelia, and asks her where her father is. When she replies “at home, my lord”, he sees the deception on her face. In the written play, I did not picture Hamlet break down as he did in the movie, but I loved the movie scene. It emphasizes Hamlet’s true heartbreak, that the only one he thought he loved, is also decieving him. This scene to me seems crucial to his overall mental state. Before, I was convinced that he was just playing at being a luny. He still had his past relationship to Ophelia, and a true love for her, as a base to hold his mind to reality. However, when he sees this as not real, when he sees that she, too, is a liar, his perception of what was or is real becomes severely skewed. He even says that he never loved her (“you should not have believed me…I loved you not”). Now, the only thing holding Hamlet to reality is Horatio, whom we learn Hamlet holds in his “heart of heart”. Everything else to Hamlet is suspicion, lies, fake, and a sense of paranoia has inflitrated his mind. He can trust no one except Horatio. If Horatio were to decieve him, which I doubt will, I am not sure Hamlet could go on living. Not even the fear of the “unknown country” would hold him back from “sleeping”.

4 responses so far

Apr 22 2009


The actor plays an actor, who is playing an actor, who then becomes an actor…

Filed under Uncategorized

     One of the main themes in plays of Shakespeare is the idea of a play within a play, and its characters acting within those second plays. In Act II of Hamlet, Prince Hamlet wants to prove to himself and others (although he already believes) that King Claudius in indeed guilty of the late King Hamlet’s murder. To do this, he devises a plan when a group of actors come to Elsinore to put on a play. Hamlet devises the plot of the play so as to relate almost exatcly to the sequence of events that lead to King Hamlet’s death. Hamlet Jr. believes that this will catalize some sort of reaction from Claudius, proving his guilty concious. From logical deduction, I can make a prediction: Claudius will be outraged at the play and ask for it to stop, or walk out, or cry and admit his wrongdoing, at which point, Hamlet, with his worst beliefs proven correct, assume his revenge. I mean, this is Shakespeare at his best. It’s basically entrapment–setting up a play to get a known reaction out of an unsuspecting person. Niiiice.

     However, I have this gut feeling that tells me that of course, something will go wrong, if not everything (we are dealing with Bill Shakespeare here). Hamlet, who may not only be acting crazy, but may in fact be a lunatic, may with his volatile rage and revenge mark the wrong man. He may kill someone else, which then will cause someone else to become volatile, and kill someone else. Or maybe, the King will learn of Hamlet’s plan? For some reason I do not think this though. Although the good guys do not always win, the evil guys never win completely, so it wouldn’t be acceptable to just have Claudius kill Hamlet.

I do not know what will happen yet in this play, but the play within the play, will indeed set along an important sequence of events, I am sure of it.

One response so far

Apr 20 2009


Shakespeare in Love–With Death

Filed under Uncategorized

    Right off the bat, The Tragedy of Hamlet encircles the reader this idea of death: the ghost haunting near the castle, and the revelation that King Hamlet was killed by none other that his own brother, Cluadius. Why did death come to him? Which people are going to get snuffed? Well, knowing Bill here, probably everybody that even remotely has a chance of living a happy, love-filled life is going to die in some sort of dramatic performance. After all, it is a play. After reading Act I, I came to the understanding that Shakespeare must have been a man with a great observation for humankind, and our nature. He, and many other scholars and philosophers such as John Locke and even our founding fathers, understood one basic plight of our human condition: and that is the thirst for power. Without law or reason, power would consume any man. Shakespeare seems to express his thoughts and messages about our nature in his tragedies, which all circle around this idea of death. In Romeo and Juliet, it is a fight between two rich families, the Montagues and the Capulets, in Macbeth, it’s a struggle for Macbeth to become “Thane”, according to the witch’s prophecies, and in Hamlet, it is a struggle between Prince Hamlet and new Dane of Denmark, Cluadius. In all of the above stories, death is at the centerpiece of it all. From what I know so far, I can be sure that someone will die in Hamlet. I am interested to know what Shakespeare’s overall intended message is in his stories of death and power. He sees them as obviously intertwined. I think Abe Lincoln’s quote that you had on the board today is quite fitting, Mrs. Hazle: “Nearly all men can stand adversity, but but if you want to test a man’s character, give him power”. We’ll see what power has in store for Prince Hamlet. Dead? Or not to be dead?

2 responses so far

Mar 28 2009


“Moss That Grows on Stones” by Mackenzie Roberts

Filed under Uncategorized

“Moss That Grows on Stones”

 

Moss that clings onto the base of rocks,

Is the ocean that used to swell this choked land,

Blue and Green, making the rocks roll with foam,

That moss knows the stones,

Of which it so delicately wishes to be a part,

Certain of their place in spells of heat or of flood,

That moss knows the wind,

That sweeps all wetness or chance of drink away,

That still burns with the sun

Cracks into the chapped craters and crevices of the forgotten land,

And that moss knows that in another week,

All moisture will be stolen,

Unless a miracle comes of bold storms that bully the dry winds,

And force upon it to carry dewy drops to the desperate land

That moss will shrivel, shrink, and crumple

While the wind steals away and without pity,

Rips it from the boulders of great certainty,

That will again someday,

Be part of the lulling seas

———————————————

 

     I write poetry on my own so I wanted to put a little something of Wilbur, and a little something of my own style into this particular poem. Wilbur loved writing about nature, so for this analogy, it is an anology for something bigger, I chose to use sort of a desert climate, that used to be an ocean (much like out west) to describe it. I used a ton of descriptive language. However, I did not rhyme, or use any certain meter. But I do think it still flows nicely.

     Now to the analogy, which can really relate to Richard Wilbur: The Man.  It can be read in two different ways I think. First, it relates to Wilburs life. Most critics (the harsh winds) never took Wilbur seriously, along with the greats (Frost, Stevens, Whitman, Dickinson), or other contemporaries (Lowell, Moore, Plath). So the moss is Wilbur, who wants to be a part of the poetry legend (rocks of certainty) that will always be there in the future. Second, it can simply be read as saying that one cannot cling onto what is or isn’t certain. Things just are. Moss does not stay in place, and rocks do. Whichever way you would like to adapt it is acceptable.

One response so far

Mar 28 2009


Final Post: Analysis of Blog

Filed under Uncategorized

I think that this blog was an interesting way to integrate education with technology, but in my honest opinion, it was not as effective in securing our wanted outcomes. I think that the research paper prepares us more for college in that it’s so universal, meaning no matter what class, you will have to conduct some kind of research and learn how to put in a formal paper. However, learning how to work a blog may become useful in the future. I liked how flexible you and Mr. Hendershot were with it, letting us kind of roll with what we have to work with (since some blogs were hard to come by). I did learn a lot about my poet, and enjoyed his poetry too!

 

(BLOG COMMENTS ARE IN THERE OWN POST! I POSTED THEM BEFORE I GOT THIS ASSIGNMENT!)

One response so far

Mar 26 2009


Comments on Blogs

Filed under Uncategorized

http://nicoleegr1.edublogs.org/2009/03/09/sylvia-plath-biography-of-a-poet/#respond Kelsey’s

http://kelseyegr1.edublogs.org/2009/03/11/background/#comment-4 Nicole’s

http://katieegr1.edublogs.org/2009/03/10/marianne-moore/#comment-12 Katie’s

http://bebitacomida.wordpress.com/2008/11/30/the-ride-by-richard-wilbur/ another blogger’s

 

 

One response so far

Mar 26 2009


Works Cited of Intertextuality Posts/Research Project as a Whole

Filed under Uncategorized

POEM ANALYSIS/ BIOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION:

http://applesandribbons.wordpress.com/2009/01/23/the-writer-richard-wilbur/ “the writer”

http://www.enotes.com/poetry-criticism/richard-wilbur biography

http://www.poetryfoundation.org/archive/poet.html?id=7411  biography

http://www.english.illinois.edu/maps/poets/s_z/wilbur/bio.htm biography

http://www.poetryarchive.org/poetryarchive/singlePoem.do?poemId=1675 “the ride” Richard Wilbur quote

http://applesandribbons.wordpress.com/2009/01/23/the-writer-richard-wilbur/ “The Writer” disagree

 

INTERTEXTUALITY:

http://bebitacomida.wordpress.com/2008/11/30/the-ride-by-richard-wilbur/ “the ride”, Robert frost

http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2006/mar/25/featuresreviews.guardianreview21 Talk about robert frost, plato

http://www.danagioia.net/essays/ewilbur.htm Robert Frost

 http://www.english.illinois.edu/Maps/poets/s_z/wilbur/imageinterview.htm interview

http://books.google.com/books?id=0SQ7ca1Sa8wC&pg=PA258&lpg=PA258&dq=Richard+Wilbur+%22the+ride%22&source=bl&ots=5-Fr0la1Du&sig=NQlWEzG5X8Ai2R8JJbXKw5QGrSQ&hl=en&ei=-mfBSaCnMIfOMpaV8LIN&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=8&ct=result#PPA42,M1

http://www.theatlantic.com/unbound/poetry/wilbur.htm  interview

http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-18626717.html sylvia plath (used for a comment)

http://www.vqronline.org/articles/1990/summer/harris-forty-years/ plath again (used for a comment)

http://project1.caryacademy.org/echoes/03-04/Richard_Wilbur/Defaultrichardwilbur.htm frost and biography

http://books.google.com/books?id=QRR8U-6KVlkC&pg=PA181&lpg=PA181&dq=richard+wilbur+and+robert+frost&source=bl&ots=Y8YXWSiB4Z&sig=WkeMcfiwg9rlj4p-yuv5LoBCr74&hl=en&ei=rnzGSeWYMNrrnQeNheC5DQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=7&ct=result#PPA184,M1

 

BOOKS FROM AQUINAS:

Bloom, Harold, ed. Contemporary Poets. New York: Chelsea House Publishers, 1986. Print.Cook, Reginald L.

The Dimensions of Robert Frost. New York: Rinehart and Company, Inc, 1958. Print.Hungerford, Edward, ed.

Poets in Progress. Chicago: Northwestern University Press, 1962. 59-72. Print.

Michelson, Bruce. Wilbur’s Poetry. Amherst: The University of Massachusetts Press, 1991. Print.

 

 

 

One response so far

Mar 26 2009


Richard Wilbur and Marianne Moore

Filed under Uncategorized

Although, for the most part, Marianne Moore’s style is more comparable to other contemporaries of her time, she still remained a great influence for Richard Wilbur and his poetry. In an interiview with Image magazine, Wilbur was asked:

“Marianne Moore’s poetics of careful, precise observation seems to have influenced not only Elizabeth Bishop’s poetry, but often your own. How important was Moore to your development? In what ways do you find yourself writing a poetry with a kinship to Bishop’s, and where are the formal and metaphysical divergences between you?”

and he replied:

“From my early high school days on, I was reading poets like Robert Frost and Hart Crane. But I didn’t get knowledgeably excited about contemporary poetry until I was in college and had been taught by a number of wonderful teachers in Amherst’s English department, teachers who had the greatest enthusiasm for, among other things, Marianne Moore. The enthusiasm of people I admired was one thing that steered me toward her. But I also felt a natural affinity for her kind of thing: for poetry of close observation, for poetry that acknowledges the importance of things however small, poetry that aims to fuse moral and other thought with the creatures of this world.”

Marianne Moore and Wilbur had two things in common: a.) They both thought that clear language was needed to make observation and b.) believed that imagery was important to the overall feeling of the poem. Moore decided to do this through enjambment, dashes and other punctuation, and shorter sentences, while Wilbur chose a more traditionalist pathway. Wilbur: 

“Found [him]self most convinced by talk upon any subject which was fully involved in the material and the circumstantial. [He] still feel[s] militantly that way: the poetry that most appeals to [him] is the least abstract and the most inclusive. “

He kept with rhyme and meter in order to portray emotions and imagery in this formalist fashion.

 For example, let’s take the poem:

“The Fish” by Marianne Moore

wade through black jade. Of the crow-blue mussel-shells, one keeps adjusting the ash-heaps; opening and shutting itself like an injured fan. The barnacles which encrust the side of the wave, cannot hide there for the submerged shafts of the sun, split like spun glass, move themselves with spotlight swiftness into the crevices— in and out, illuminating the turquoise sea of bodies. The water drives a wedge of iron throught the iron edge of the cliff; whereupon the stars, pink rice-grains, ink- bespattered jelly fish, crabs like green lilies, and submarine toadstools, slide each on the other. All external marks of abuse are present on this defiant edifice— all the physical features of ac- cident—lack of cornice, dynamite grooves, burns, and hatchet strokes, these things stand out on it; the chasm-side is dead. Repeated evidence ahs proved that it can live on what can not revive its youth. The sea grows old in it.

 

(note: This poem will not show up right on this post, click on the name of the poem in order to see its form)

          With the exception of a few poems, like “He Made This Screen”, Moore does not use a rhyming scheme. This poem is this way for a reason. She wants to point out the characteristics of the fish, and use her imagery to demonstrate these. The text is in the shape of a water current, and it “flows” (haha) with the poem itself. Moore wanted to stress imagery. Wilbur took this, and his love of nature and the things in it, and used it in his poetry, in a formalist method. In the poems below he uses rhyme, rythm and meter, but imagery is still CENTRAL to his poetry:

“Orchard Trees, January” by Wilbur

It’s not the case, though some might wish it so
Who from a window watch the blizzard blow

White riot through their branches vague and stark,
That they keep snug beneath their pelted bark.

—————————————————————————-

They take affliction in until it jells
To crystal ice between their frozen cells,

—————————————————————————

And each of them is inwardly a vault
Of jewels rigorous and free of fault,

—————————————————————————

Unglimpsed until in May it gently bears
A sudden crop of green-pronged solitaires. 

————————————————————————–
 

OR

“Love Calls Us to the Things of This World” by Wilbur

 

 

The eyes open to a cry of pulleys,
And spirited from sleep, the astounded
soul

Hangs for a moment bodiless and
simple

As false dawn.
Outside the open window
The morning air is all awash with                           

angels.                                                             

—————————————————-

Some are in bed-sheets, some are
in blouses,
Some are in smocks: but truly there
they are.
Now they are rising together in calm
swells
Of halcyon feeling, filling whatever they
wear
With the deep joy of their impersonal
breathing;

——————————————————–

Now they are flying in place,
conveying
The terrible speed of their
omnipresence, moving
And staying like white water; and now
of a sudden
They swoon down in so rapt a quiet
That nobody seems to be there.
The soul shrinks

—————————————————–

From all that it is about to remember,
From the punctual rape of every
blessed day,
And cries,
“Oh, let there be nothing on
earth but laundry,
Nothing but rosy hands in the rising
steam
And clear dances done in the sight of
heaven.”

—————————————————-

Yet, as the sun acknowledges
With a warm look the world’s hunks
and colors, 
The soul descends once more in bitter                        This is my favorite stanza. Great imagery.

love
To accept the waking body, saying now
In a changed voice as the man yawns
and rises,

——————————————————

“Bring them down from their ruddy
gallows;
Let there be clean linen for the backs
of thieves;
Let lovers go fresh and sweet to be
undone,
And the heaviest nuns walk in a pure
floating
Of dark habits,
keeping their difficult
balance.”

—————————————————–

 

      

 In this poem, Richard Wilbur does use enjambment, and some punctuation differences. Again, imagery is crtical in this poem, as Wilbur describes “a soul” that has escaped from his body, and wanders around, and then returns again into the “waking body”.

 

 

Here is the an example of a poem where Moore uses rhyme. I referenced it above, and is just here if anyone needs it.

He Made This Screen” by Moore

not of silver nor of coral,
but of weatherbeaten laurel.

———————————-

here, he introduced a sea
uniform like tapestry;

———————————-

here, a fig-tree; there, a face;
there, a dragon circling space-

———————————-

designating here, a bower;
there, a pointed passion-flower.

———————————-

 

 
 

 

 

 

 

 

3 responses so far

Older Posts »