Questions that haunt my mind and soul bear no solution nor resolution April 27, 2009
Posted by djegr1 in : Uncategorized , 1 comment so farThe final act of Hamlet was, in my opinion, was over dramatic. Obviously because it’s Shakespeare, it wasn’t going to have a happy ending, but did practically everyone have to die?? Ophelia dies on accident, Claudius inadvertently kills Gertrude, Laertes dies, and ultimately Hamlet dies…Of course. I didn’t feel any resolution with the ending at all. Everyone dropped like flies and it was just very overly dramatic. However, I thought it was interesting that Hamlet essentially killed Rosencrantz and Guildenstern. Though, I guess they had it coming as did Claudius. But Gertrude, Ophelia, and Laertes? What did they ever do to fate?
Mr. Shakespeare, I have a few questions for you…
1. Why did you include a relationship between Ophelia and Hamlet if it really did nothing to further the plot?
2. Now, I know that your plays are meant for stages and not pages, but did you mean to include so many characters? It just outright confused me whenever you brought in various characters that, like the non-existant romance, had no important role.
3. Are you incapable of writing a happy ending and not including “The Tragedy Of…” in the title?
4. Why did you have to kill EVERYBODY? Gertrude should’ve come to her senses and killed Claudius herself.
5. What was with the ghost? Did he ever get to go to the bright, white light?
Okay, so I didn’t completely hate the play. I had a few favorite moments. Keyword: Few. I liked it when Claudius finally dropped dead as with Polonius. They were both onboxious in their own right. My favorite moment was when Ophelia went mad and sang. I don’t know why, but I found it very comical. I’m so weird…
This truth drives me into madness April 25, 2009
Posted by djegr1 in : Uncategorized , 1 comment so farAct Three closes with Hamlet accidentally killing Polonius and Gertrude finally hears Hamlet out and agrees to keep his secret. I kind of found it comical, yet tragic, that Ophelia has gone mad. One thing I’ve learned from Hamlet is that death causes insanity. I can’t wait to see how Kate Winslet plays out the musical scene… Meanwhile, Claudius is sending Hamlet to England and has secretly ordered him to be put to death. Claudius is a strange man. When is he going to die? At this point, Hamlet hasn’t really taken any action in his plan for revenge. Though, Laertes’ return seems to me an uprising among the people for a new king. Act Four is very confusing to me. I think it’s muddled with odd details and sideplots, particularly the pirate part. I don’t know why, but I was very confused at this point. It’s almost as if the play has become too dramatic and over the top (Sorry Mrs. Hazle!).
Ok, so we all know I love music and particularly a band named Evanescence. The whole time we’ve been reading Hamlet, there’s one Evanescence song that always comes to mind. It’s called “Whisper” and I think it fits rather nicely with Hamlet. A portion of the lyrics is “Catch me as I fall/Say you’re here and it’s all over now/Speaking to the atmosphere/No one’s here and I fall into myself”. Below are YouTube links to two versions of the song. Let me know what you think! The first one is a demo version, but it’s EPIC. The intro is “O Verona” from Romeo and Juliet. The second link is the normal version that appears on Evanescence’s debut CD “Fallen”. While this one does not have the neato-bandido intro, the ending is shaweet. Enjoy!
Be All My Sins Rememb’red April 23, 2009
Posted by djegr1 in : Uncategorized , 1 comment so farWhoa! Act Three was obnoxiously long and since it’s Shakespeare, it took forever to get through. I will admit that I did fall sleep towards the end, but only because I was on the couch laying down, and well…yeah… This post, like my last is written on the basis of my initial understanding of the play. I don’t feel like waiting around to watching the movie to see what I have right or wrong.
So, Act Three is a very dramatic portion of the play. Hamlet arranges the traveling acting troupe to perform a play that resembles his father’s murder. He’s hoping to get a reaction from his uncle-step father-king-man. I think this is smart of Hamlet to do; this way, he can get a better sense on the situation and will hopefully gain some confidence in his ploy for revenge. At this point, I think some of Hamlet’s “madness” is from his distrust in his own self. Also during Act Three, Hamlet says, “You should not have believed me…I loved you not” (pg 79) whilst talking to Ophelia. He basically confesses that he does not love her, or at least, he says he doesn’t. Knowing Hamlet, I wouldn’t be surprised if this was just another one of his tricks to keep people distracted. Keep in mind that I am a hopeless romantic, so this was very devastating news to me.
Something that caught my attention was Hamlet’s reference to Nero. He says, “The sould of Nero enter this firm bosom./…I will speak daggers to her, but use none” (pg. 99). I recalled the name “Nero”, but had to use the footnote to remind me who it was. Nero killed his mother for poisoning her husband, Claudius. Interestingly enough, the Hamlet’s uncle-step father-king man’s name is Claudius. Is Shakespeare foreshadowing something with this reference? Will Gertrude realize that she married the killer of her late husband and kill her new husband out of her own revenge? I hope so because so far, Gertrude has kind of been a boring character and it’d be nice to see her come to her senses and take charge.
What’s Love Got to Do With It? April 21, 2009
Posted by djegr1 in : Uncategorized , 1 comment so farPolonius.
Madam, I swear I use no art at all.
That he is mad, ’tis true: ’tis true ’tis pity;
And pity ’tis ’tis true. A foolish figure!
But farewell it, for I will use no art.
Mad let us grant him then. And now remains
That we find out the cuase of this effect-
Or rather say, the cause of this defect,
For this effect defective comes by cause.
Thus it remains, and the remainder thus.
Perpend:
I have a daughter (have while she is mine)
Who in her duty and obedience, mark,
Hath given me this. Now gather, and surmise.
Hamlet’s sanity is called into question various times so far in the play and I’m starting to think that we’ll never find out whether he is truly insane or not. However, it was interesting that Polonius comments on Hamlet’s madness. He says, “For this effect defective comes by cause”, meaning that Hamlet’s madness comes from his love for Ophelia, Polonius’ daughter. Polonius proceeds to give the King and Queen letters and poems that Hamlet wrote to Ophelia, providing hard evidence of their “love”. Now, Hamlet and Ophelia’s love has also been questionable and at first, after I read the letters and poems, I truly believed they were in love, or at least that Hamlet loved Ophelia.
However, after I reread Polonius’ speech (the one above), I began to wonder if the letters and poems were fake. After all, Polonius strictly told Ophelia that Hamlet’s vows were “brokers” and that she was a “green girl” and a “baby”. I guess what I’m getting at is that I believe that Polonius forged the poems and letters in an attempt to get the King and Queen to interfere and keep Hamlet away from Ophelia. The hopeless romantic in me wants Hamlet and Ophelia’s love to be true, but I’m pretty sure that they’re not going to have a happy ending. This is Shakespeare after all. Besides, Hamlet and Ophelia’s fails to take center stage and seems more like a way to distract audiences/readers, to lead them astray.
Anyone else have any thoughts on this?
Shakespeare Say What? April 18, 2009
Posted by djegr1 in : Uncategorized , 1 comment so farReading Shakespeare is never easy. You either A) understand all of it right off the bat (lucky you!), B) understand some of it (that’s me!) or you are left wondering what the heck is going on and rush off to SparkNotes for some godly help. Well, thankfully Hamlet is one of the plays where I understand the gist of what’s going on without having to look up every line for a translation.
Act I dives right into the drama of the play and really hooks a reader in. I really like the ghost aspect of Hamlet and am glad that we are introduced to the ghost right at the start. What I really liked about Act I, however, was the hint of a relationship between Ophelia and Hamlet. Ophelia is persuaded to believe that Hamlet has no true regard for her and is advised twice to stay away from him. It was interesting to get Ophelia’s side of the affair first, rather than Hamlet’s, who is the main character.
It’s rather odd that Hamlet’s uncle married his dead brother’s wife. Who would do that kind of a thing? I mean, really? That’s just disrespectful and, well, just odd. Though, the uncle is not all to blame. Hamlet’s mother agreed to it! Ah! Why would she do that? I wonder if her motives for the marriage will ever be revealed or if I’m just making it a bigger deal than it truly is. Who knows what will unfold in Hamlet. Shakespeare isn’t one for simple, straight-forward stories…
Click Me! (it’s a mind map of Hamlet)
Rich With Intertextuality March 23, 2009
Posted by djegr1 in : Uncategorized , 2 comments
Finding a poet who shared a connection with my own, Marge Piercy, was daunting and hard. Thanks to Mrs. Hazle, I was able to find that Adrienne Rich was a suitable poet. The Norton Anthology of Modern Poetry says, “Many of Rich’s poetry focuses on her struggle as a woman, and she became involved in the woman’s civil rights movement…” (Thanks maddieegr1!). Piercy’s poetry also strongly focuses on the struggles of being a woman and she also took part in the civil rights movements.
Rich’s poem “Living in Sin” reminds me a little bit of Piercy’s, “To Have Without Holding”. According to blogger maddieegr1, Rich’s poem describes a woman who longs for something more and different from her marriage. The woman’s husband is ignorant to their problems and does nothing to remedy the situation. They are stuck on a tragic merry-go-round. In Piercy’s, “To Have Without Holding” has an excellent line that expresses the fact that couples need to love each other and be committed to their relationship. It says, “…to love consciously/conscientiously, concretely, constructively.” Maddieegr1 also suggests that the woman in Rich’s poem is cheating on her husband. This idea echoes in Piercy’s poem with the line, “It pesters to remember/the lover who is not in the bed”.
Both poets create strong images in their poems. They both create images that are concrete and express exactly what the writer wanted. For example, in “Living in Sin”, Rich says things like, “panes relieved of grime”, “a pair of beetle-eyes”, and “like a relentless milkman up the stairs”. Piercy says things like, “doors banging on their hinges”, “thwack like rubber bands”, and “you float and sail, a helium balloon”. Piercy and Rich share more than similar subjects, they also have a similar writing style, despite the fact that the two lived in different places.
Piercy + Whitman = Intertextuality…yaay March 21, 2009
Posted by djegr1 in : Uncategorized , 1 comment so farMarge Piercy has stated various times that Walt Whitman is one of the poets who inspires her the most. Kerstin W. Shands, an English professor at the University College of South Stockholm, stated in her book, The Repair of the World, that, “If we were to place Piercy in American literature history and trace her roots, it is Walt Whitman…who is Piercy’s most important literary and spiritual forefather.” (Shands 5). Piercy also has said that by looking at the type of line she has used, she sees the influence of Whitman in regards to using longer and “prophetic” lines. (Her poem, “Laying Down the Tower”, is an example of this, in which she utilizes Tarot cards as the basis of the poem.)
Jay Parini and Brett C. Miller also have noted Whitman’s influence on Piercy in their book, The Columbia History of American Poetry. Parini and Miller comment on the political value Whitman holds for writers. They say,
“…Such poets as Marge Piercy…who understand U.S. nationalism as itself a constraint on democratic processes have discovered a Whitman answerable to the needs of the feminist…movements.” (Parini and Miller 170-171).
Whitman was an extremely open-minded poet who never shied away from writing about anything and everything he felt passionate about, which included his views on society. In a previous post, I discussed Piercy’s poem “The Woman in the Ordinary”, which describes women with strong imagery. Whitman’s poem, “I Sing the Body Electric” contains ideas and elements that are seen in Piercy’s poem. In section eight of “I Sing the Body Electric”, it says:
Have you ever loved the body of a woman?
Have you ever loved the body of a man?
Do you not see that these are exactly the same to all in all nations and
times all over the earth?
Whitman directly asks whether or not his audience views women as equals with men. Piercy’s “The Woman in the Ordinary” focuses on the fact that women are more than what they are often viewed as, which is weak and powerless. As I said in the earlier post, the poem’s message is that women have power and in turn, have the same power and capabilities as men.
Both Piercy and Whitman are successful and impactful imagists. They never fail to get their point across and often leave readers with a clear, distinct image. However, their styles slightly differ. While Piercy describes women in a more metaphorical manner in her poem, Whitman approaches imagery in a more flowery way. Piercy uses descriptions such as, “woman as peppery as curry”, “woman of butter and brass”, and “massive thighs that neigh”. Whitman, however, uses descriptions such as “a divine nimbus exhales from it from head to foot” and “see the bent head and arms folded over breast”.
Whitman set the standard for imagery and many writers have followed his lead. Piercy and Whitman share similar ideas (life with equal subjects) and similar styles (their concrete imagery). Who knows how Piercy’s poetry could’ve been without Whitman’s early influence? Piercy, still an original and groundbreaking poet, manages to create beautiful and impactful poems, all the while embodying Whitman and his techniques.
—————————
Links
The Columbia History of American Poetry
Looking At Myself – A Study Focused Myopia
—————————
Citations
Parini, Jay, and Brett C. Miller. The Columbia History of American Poetry. Columbia University Press, 1993. 170-71. 21 Mar. 2009http://books.google.com/books?id=HWav5Dy1tYMC&pg=PA121&source=gbs_toc_r&cad=0_0#PPA171,M1.
Shands, Kerstin W. The Repair of the World. Ann Arbor: Greenwood Press, 1994. 21 Mar. 2009 http://books.google.com/books?id=v_AyAAAAMAAJ&q=Marge+piercy+emily+dickinson&dq=Marge+piercy+emily+dickinson&lr=&pgis=1
Piercy, Marge. “Looking At Myself – A Study Focused Myopia.” Marge Piercy. 2005. 21 Mar. 2009 <http://margepiercy.com/essays/myopia.htm>.
The woman in the ordinary March 17, 2009
Posted by djegr1 in : Uncategorized , 2 commentsThe woman in the ordinary pudgy downcast girl
is crouching with eyes and muscles clenched.
Round and pebble smooth she effaces herself
under ripples of conversation and debate. (um, I wish I could write things like that…)
The woman in the block of ivory soap
has massive thighs that neigh,
great breasts that blare and strong arms that trumpet. (really, who would’ve thought of that?)
The woman of the golden fleece
laughs uproariously from the belly (we need to laugh more like that)
inside the girl who imitates
a Christmas card virgin with glued hands,
who fishes for herself in other’s eyes,
who stoops and creeps to make herself smaller.
In her bottled up is a woman peppery as curry,
a yam of a woman of butter and brass,
compounded of acid and sweet like a pineapple, (seriously, this woman is good)
like a handgrenade set to explode,
like goldenrod ready to bloom.
*the comments in parentheses are just my own little thoughts on my favorite (bolded) parts of this poem*
Using the Vendler Format of analysis, I carefully studied, read and re-read Marge Piercy’s poem, “The woman in the ordinary”. In general, the poem is about women and how they’re stereotyped to be what society viewed/views women as, which is weak, submissive, and powerless. The backstory of the poem seems to be Piercy’s outrage with the way women are treated and expected to be.
R Baird Shuman says in the book, Great American Writers: Twentieth Century, that “Behind [the woman's] benign face is a power made stronger through compression into the tiny cardboard role that society has given her” (1206). This point is clearly expressed through Piercy’s to-the-point imagery and feeling of tension. Examples of this include the lines, “crouching with eyes and muscles clenched” and “strong arms that trumpet”. Shuman later says, “The power is both as dangerous as an explosive device and as beautiful as a budding flower” (1206). This statement is further illustrated with the contrasting lines, such as “massive thighs that neigh”, “woman of the golden fleece” and “woman of butter and brass”.
The poem itself, is a single stanza, with no division of parts. Piercy makes frequent use of enjambment, which helps the poem flow. Each “sentence” is it’s own scenario and depicts several different women, which adds a variety of characters within one subject. The tone of the poem is tense and blunt. It also has a tone of urgency. Piercy shows the differences in women, but unifies them with their self-empowerment and rising ideals of identity. The poem is clear and to-the-point, with poignant language. Piercy achieves this through her concise descriptions, never failing to say what she wants.
Shuman, R. Baird. Great American Writers: Twentieth Century. New York: Marshall Cavendish, 2002.
The Long Death part 2 March 15, 2009
Posted by djegr1 in : Uncategorized , 1 comment so farMarge Piercy’s “The Long Death”, on a literal level, focuses on nuclear power and possibly even nuclear warfare. With words like “radiation”, “death”, and “murder”, it’s not hard to see such a message. Piercy makes use of strong, to-the-point imagery to present the negative side of harnassing nuclear power. Such as, “radiation like seeping gas” (24) and ”sulphur in the air” (33). Some poets choose to create strong images with flowry descriptions, but Piercy successfully creates the same effect using concrete nouns and adjectives. Like most of her poems, “The Long Death” contains no rhyme scheme and is more like a narration. However, this enables the poem to be bold, poignant, and fluid all at the same time.
Blogger rinabeana selected Piercy’s “The Long Death” for their Poem of the Day. Here’s what they had to say about the poem:
“I wonder if she intended this as a wake-up call. I believe many of her points are valid, but I’m not against nuclear power on principle. It’s like anything else with dangerous effects; it has to be done with appropriate precautions.”
Unlike, rinabeana and many other people, I feel that the poem is about more than just nuclear power. The dedication that appears below the title in publications (it can be seen in the title of my previous post) makes me wonder if the poem is really about the death of one of Piercy’s friends. The poem may, on the surface, focus on nuclear power and the negative affects, but by connecting words in the poem like “radiation” and “leukemia” to the dedication, I realized that the poem’s deeper meaning and purpose was for Piercy to mourn the loss of a friend. Thematically, the poem still centers around the subject of death, but instead of nuclear power, I believe that “The Long Death” is really about an acquaintance of Piercy’s who died from cancer.
*Please take a look at the poem in my previous post and let me know what you think…
The Long Death- for Wendy Teresa Simon (1954-1979) March 15, 2009
Posted by djegr1 in : Uncategorized , add a comment- Radiation is like oppression
the average daily kind of subliminal toothache
you get almost used to, the stench
of chlorine in the water, of smog in the wind.We comprehend the disasters of the moment,
the nursing home fire, the river in flood
pouring over the sandbag levee, the airplane
crash with fragments of burnt bodies
scattered among the hunks of twisted metal,
the grenade in the marketplace; the sinking ship.
But how to grasp a thing that does not
kill you today or tomorrow
but slowly from the inside in twenty years.
How to feel that a corporate or governmental
choice means we bear twisted genes and our
grandchildren will be stillborn if our
children are very lucky.
Slow death can not be photographed for the six
o’clock news. It’s all statistical,
the gross national product or the prime
lending rate. Yet if our eyes saw
in the right spectrum, how it would shine,
lurid as magenta neon.
If we could smell radiation like seeping
gas, if we could sense it as heat, if we
could hear it as a low ominous roar
of the earth shifting, then we would not sit
and be poisoned while industry spokesmen
talk of acceptable millirems and .02
cancer per population thousand.
We acquiesce at murder so long as it is slow,
murder from asbestos dust, from tobacco,
from lead in the water, from sulphur in the air,
and fourteen years later statistics are printed
on the rise in leukemia among children.
We never see their faces. They never stand,
those poisoned children together in a courtyard,
and are gunned down by men in three-piece suits.
The shipyard workers who built nuclear
submarines, the soldiers who were marched
into the Nevada desert to be tested by the
H-bomb, the people who work in power plants,
they die quietly years after in hospital
ward and not on the evening news.
The soft spring rain floats down and the air
is perfumed with pine and earth. Seedlings
drink it in, robins sop it in puddles,
you run in it and feel clean and strong,
the spring rain blowing from the irradiated
cloud over the power plant.
Radiation is oppression, the daily average
kind, the kind you’re almost used to
and live with as the years abrade you,
high blood pressure, ulcers, cramps, migraine,
a hacking cough; you take it inside
and it becomes pain and you say, not
They are killing me, but I am sick now.
*taken from http://www.ratical.org/radiation/NGP/LongDeath.html*
