Prompt: One of the strongest human drives seems to be a desire for power. Write an
essay in which you discuss how a character in a novel or a drama struggles to free himself or
herself from the power of others or seeks to gain power over others. Be sure to demonstrate in
your essay how the author uses this power struggle to enhance the meaning of the work.
The title character of Hamlet by William Shakespeare constantly pleads with himself to find his purpose and acts irrationally in his attempts to control the direction of his life. The main conflict in Hamlet's life is deciding if he is his father's son, the heir to the throne, or if he is his own man with freewill. Although Hamlet may not be conscious of it, his character symbolizes a young man who is caught in a rift of power with his father's ghost on one side and his uncle and princely duties on the other. Shakespeare's Hamlet believes he is fighting for justice, which will in turn help him identify himself as a man, but the message behind his struggle is his inability to set himself free and lack of control.
Hamlet believes that by killing Claudius he will avenge his father's wrongful death and defeat his nemesis, but he is unaware that by taking the ghosts orders he is losing his own identity. Hamlet was on his way to carving his own destiny by attending university until his father's untimely death brought him back to Elsinore. Old Hamlet's ghost orders his son to avenge his death and Hamlet naturally feels obligated to abide. In Hamlet's eyes, killing Claudius seems like a good dead, but he fails to weigh the consequences of how executing the deed would impact him. First of all, Hamlet did not want to be king, so making such a bold power move would not put him in a favorable position. Secondly, Old Hamlet was hardly a father figure to him and taking such a risk to avenge his death really would not supply Hamlet with much pride. It is too late when Hamlet realizes that killing Claudius will not benefit him and the young man gives up control of his life over to providence. The once headstrong and ambitious young scholar loses the battle to free himself of other people's control because he was too trusting in others to have his best interest.
The lack of control Hamlet has of his life is illustrated in the limited choices he feels he has. To Hamlet he feels he has only three options: Listen to the ghost, accept his position as heir to the throne, or kill himself. He spends little time contemplating the idea of returning to university, or escaping to be independent. An important motif in Hamlet is isolation and can be seen in Hamlet's sense of being trapped in Elsinore. Even if he were to escape from the castle and go back to university, he would still be under the surveillance of Claudius' spies. The dominant power Claudius has on Hamlet's activities is overbearing and in turn has made the prince believe that his only chance at control in is life is suicide. Hamlet could very well leave Elsinore, but not matter where he escapes to he will be a prisoner in his own head. Therefore, Hamlet's ability to free himself from his royal duties and Claudius' overpowering grip is almost nonexistent because he does not believe he could ever truly escape.
Shakespeare's Hamlet suggests that fulfilling the needs of others as a way to find one's own independence will lead to their own loss of identity and control in their life. In the eyes of Hamlet, deciding on whether to kill Claudius determines his morality and if he is a faithful son. However, to the audience it is more of a question if Hamlet will embark on his own destiny, or follow the orders of his superiors. His failure to think for himself and be free from the control others have on his life results in the loss of his individuality.
Sunday, April 20, 2014
Thursday, April 17, 2014
Summary and Analysis: Ceremony
Author
Lesile Marmon Silko, born in Albuquerque, NM in 1948, grew up an outsider among her tribe on the Laguna Pueblo Reservation. Silko was only 1/4 Pueblo and also identified with Anglo American and Mexican which excluded her from tribal activities. Ceremony was published in 1977 and in 1981 she was awarded the MacArthur Foundation Grant and and the Native Writers' Circle of the Americas Lifetime Achievement Award in 1994. Critics have associated Silko as one of the key figures of the Native American Renaissance.
Setting
On a Laguna Pueblo Reservation located about thirty-five miles from Albuquerque, and about seventy miles from Los Alamos. Presumably the same reservation that Silko grew up on.
Characters
Tayo- A half-white, half-Laguna man who has returned from WWII and is continuing to struggle with "battle fatique".
Betonie- A mixed blood Navajo healer who guides Tayo to complete a new ceremony he believes will cure the contemporary world. He is an outcast due to his unconventional methods and contact with whites.
Auntie- Raised Tayo as a child after his mother (her younger sister) was banished and resents him for being mixed. She is a firm believer in Laguna traditions, but is also a Catholic convert. She runs the household and seeks the grief of her neighbors for all her burdens.
Josiah- Tayo's uncle. He is one of the few people on the reservation who accept Tayo and takes his nephew under his wing to educate him about Laguna traditions. Josiah abides to both traditional customs, but also had an affair with the Mexican Night Swan and raised Mexican cattle.
Night Swan-An attractive, Mexican woman, probably a katsina, who seduces men to teach them to interact and live harmoniously among people outside of their race.
Harley- Tayo's childhood friend who also went off to war, but is apparently in a more stable mental state than Tayo. Harley, like most Pueblos returned from the war, spends his free time in bars and developed a severe alcohol dependency.
Rocky- Tayo's cousin and adoptive brother. Tayo followed him off to war, but Rocky died in the Philippines. When Tayo returns home, he feels guilty that he survived instead of Rocky because he was the perfect son--a native pueblo successfully assimilated to white culture.
Grandma-Tayo's grandmother serves as a female in the novel who is the most consistent with her Laguna traditions/beliefs. She recommends that Tayo see a medicine man and slips him pieces of wisdom through out his life.
Old Ku'oosh- The Laguna medicine man. He is not successful in curing Tayo using a traditional ceremony and recommends him to Betonie. Although traditional, Ku'oosh is accepting of Tayo after he completes the new ceremony.
Emo- A childhood friend and foil to Tayo. Emo belittles Tayo about his mixed blood, yet he brags about how in the war days he would sleep with white women and was treated like a white man. When Tayo begins to criticize Emo for his glorified perception on the war, Tayo becomes the target of his anger.
Plot
Tayo returns from war traumatized by Rocky's death and a vivid hallucination he had of watching Josiah be executed. After he is released from the Veteran's Hospital, he finds his homeland is suffering from drought which he blames himself for because he prayed for rain to stop while he fought in the jungles of Philippines. The protagonist is revisited by a childhood friends and finds that they have all become alcoholics and pass the time talking about how great the war was and the respect they received when in uniform. Their ignorance of the "white destruction" and their lack of respect for their heritage makes Tayo sick and he feels even more of an outcast. Tayo's health worsens and his Grandmother sends for Ku'oosh to cure him. However, Ku'oosh's traditional ceremony seems too outdated to rid whatever evil is in Tayo's body.
As predicted, Ku'oosh's ceremony does not cure Tayo and he begins to reflect on the events leading up the war. He recalls the Mexican cattle he helped Josiah raise and beautiful Night Swan. The summer before he went off to war there was a drought, yet Tayo managed to successfully invent a rain ceremony. That same summer, Tayo slept with Night Swan.
Ku'oosh recommends Tayo to seek the help of a controversial medicine man, Betonie. The medicine man has a unique knowledge of the issues that occur when Native Americans come in contact with whites and after listening to Tayo's problems, he realizes they will need to create a new ceremony. Betonie tells Tayo that his grandfather started a ceremony similar to the one that they must conduct to defeat white destruction, but says there is still more to be done. From there Tayo is set on a mission to find Josiah's cattle. Along the way he follows the stars to a women's home, named Ts'eh, and climbs a mountain where he finds the cattle. When he looses track of the cattle a mountain lion appears and guides him to the lifestock. As he tries to herd the cattle, he is stopped by two white patrolmen who agree to let him off for trespassing if he hunts the lion. While he searches, it begins to snow which masks the animal tracks and he runs back to Ts'eh's home to find she has successfully corralled the cattle.
Although Tayo retrieves Josiah's cattle, the drought persists a signal that the ceremony has yet to completed. Tayo spends the rest of the summer with Ts'eh and receives some alarming news from his Uncle that Emo and the police are searching for him. Ts'eh helps Tayo escape from the police and Tayo takes refuge in a former uranium mine to hide from Emo, Harley, and Leroy. Tayo realizes that this symbol of white destruction is the final piece to his ceremony. His angry friends catch up to him and we has to hide while silently witness Emo kill Harley. Tayo returns to Ku'oosh's hut to tell him about the ceremony which he discovered was blessed by A'moo'ooh--disguised as Ts'eh. Since leaving the mine, the drought has ended and the white destruction has ceased. Tayo spends the night at Ku'oosh's hut to finish off the ceremony and peacefully returns home.
Narrative Voice
Ceremony is written in the third person and mostly focuses on the thoughts and feelings of Tayo. However, a new voice enters the novel in each of the poems that split up the text.
Theme
In Leslie Marmon Silko's Ceremony, it is suggested that adapting and blending cultures is the best way to avoid destruction and promote human unity.
Quotes
"They never thought to blame white people for any of it; they wanted white people for their friends.(39)"
Although miscegenation is a motif in this novel, Tayo is pretty opposed to the integration of Pueblo people and whites because he feels they are the root of all the destruction to his ancestor's land and even in Japan. This shows how badly Tayo wishes to see a change in his fellow Pueblos and completely cut ties to white society.
"'It seems like I already heard these stories before...only thing is, the names sound different. (242)"'
Grandma ending the novel with this phrase is evidence of the intertextuality that is the basis of Ceremony. Silko retells the classic clan/tribe stories that she grew up with through the journey of a "modern" man, or unexpected hero. The many layers of tradition and stories that make up this novel are really what makes this such a revered piece of Native American literature.
Lesile Marmon Silko, born in Albuquerque, NM in 1948, grew up an outsider among her tribe on the Laguna Pueblo Reservation. Silko was only 1/4 Pueblo and also identified with Anglo American and Mexican which excluded her from tribal activities. Ceremony was published in 1977 and in 1981 she was awarded the MacArthur Foundation Grant and and the Native Writers' Circle of the Americas Lifetime Achievement Award in 1994. Critics have associated Silko as one of the key figures of the Native American Renaissance.
Setting
On a Laguna Pueblo Reservation located about thirty-five miles from Albuquerque, and about seventy miles from Los Alamos. Presumably the same reservation that Silko grew up on.
Characters
Tayo- A half-white, half-Laguna man who has returned from WWII and is continuing to struggle with "battle fatique".
Betonie- A mixed blood Navajo healer who guides Tayo to complete a new ceremony he believes will cure the contemporary world. He is an outcast due to his unconventional methods and contact with whites.
Auntie- Raised Tayo as a child after his mother (her younger sister) was banished and resents him for being mixed. She is a firm believer in Laguna traditions, but is also a Catholic convert. She runs the household and seeks the grief of her neighbors for all her burdens.
Josiah- Tayo's uncle. He is one of the few people on the reservation who accept Tayo and takes his nephew under his wing to educate him about Laguna traditions. Josiah abides to both traditional customs, but also had an affair with the Mexican Night Swan and raised Mexican cattle.
Night Swan-An attractive, Mexican woman, probably a katsina, who seduces men to teach them to interact and live harmoniously among people outside of their race.
Harley- Tayo's childhood friend who also went off to war, but is apparently in a more stable mental state than Tayo. Harley, like most Pueblos returned from the war, spends his free time in bars and developed a severe alcohol dependency.
Rocky- Tayo's cousin and adoptive brother. Tayo followed him off to war, but Rocky died in the Philippines. When Tayo returns home, he feels guilty that he survived instead of Rocky because he was the perfect son--a native pueblo successfully assimilated to white culture.
Grandma-Tayo's grandmother serves as a female in the novel who is the most consistent with her Laguna traditions/beliefs. She recommends that Tayo see a medicine man and slips him pieces of wisdom through out his life.
Old Ku'oosh- The Laguna medicine man. He is not successful in curing Tayo using a traditional ceremony and recommends him to Betonie. Although traditional, Ku'oosh is accepting of Tayo after he completes the new ceremony.
Emo- A childhood friend and foil to Tayo. Emo belittles Tayo about his mixed blood, yet he brags about how in the war days he would sleep with white women and was treated like a white man. When Tayo begins to criticize Emo for his glorified perception on the war, Tayo becomes the target of his anger.
Plot
Tayo returns from war traumatized by Rocky's death and a vivid hallucination he had of watching Josiah be executed. After he is released from the Veteran's Hospital, he finds his homeland is suffering from drought which he blames himself for because he prayed for rain to stop while he fought in the jungles of Philippines. The protagonist is revisited by a childhood friends and finds that they have all become alcoholics and pass the time talking about how great the war was and the respect they received when in uniform. Their ignorance of the "white destruction" and their lack of respect for their heritage makes Tayo sick and he feels even more of an outcast. Tayo's health worsens and his Grandmother sends for Ku'oosh to cure him. However, Ku'oosh's traditional ceremony seems too outdated to rid whatever evil is in Tayo's body.
As predicted, Ku'oosh's ceremony does not cure Tayo and he begins to reflect on the events leading up the war. He recalls the Mexican cattle he helped Josiah raise and beautiful Night Swan. The summer before he went off to war there was a drought, yet Tayo managed to successfully invent a rain ceremony. That same summer, Tayo slept with Night Swan.
Ku'oosh recommends Tayo to seek the help of a controversial medicine man, Betonie. The medicine man has a unique knowledge of the issues that occur when Native Americans come in contact with whites and after listening to Tayo's problems, he realizes they will need to create a new ceremony. Betonie tells Tayo that his grandfather started a ceremony similar to the one that they must conduct to defeat white destruction, but says there is still more to be done. From there Tayo is set on a mission to find Josiah's cattle. Along the way he follows the stars to a women's home, named Ts'eh, and climbs a mountain where he finds the cattle. When he looses track of the cattle a mountain lion appears and guides him to the lifestock. As he tries to herd the cattle, he is stopped by two white patrolmen who agree to let him off for trespassing if he hunts the lion. While he searches, it begins to snow which masks the animal tracks and he runs back to Ts'eh's home to find she has successfully corralled the cattle.
Although Tayo retrieves Josiah's cattle, the drought persists a signal that the ceremony has yet to completed. Tayo spends the rest of the summer with Ts'eh and receives some alarming news from his Uncle that Emo and the police are searching for him. Ts'eh helps Tayo escape from the police and Tayo takes refuge in a former uranium mine to hide from Emo, Harley, and Leroy. Tayo realizes that this symbol of white destruction is the final piece to his ceremony. His angry friends catch up to him and we has to hide while silently witness Emo kill Harley. Tayo returns to Ku'oosh's hut to tell him about the ceremony which he discovered was blessed by A'moo'ooh--disguised as Ts'eh. Since leaving the mine, the drought has ended and the white destruction has ceased. Tayo spends the night at Ku'oosh's hut to finish off the ceremony and peacefully returns home.
Narrative Voice
Ceremony is written in the third person and mostly focuses on the thoughts and feelings of Tayo. However, a new voice enters the novel in each of the poems that split up the text.
Theme
In Leslie Marmon Silko's Ceremony, it is suggested that adapting and blending cultures is the best way to avoid destruction and promote human unity.
Quotes
"They never thought to blame white people for any of it; they wanted white people for their friends.(39)"
Although miscegenation is a motif in this novel, Tayo is pretty opposed to the integration of Pueblo people and whites because he feels they are the root of all the destruction to his ancestor's land and even in Japan. This shows how badly Tayo wishes to see a change in his fellow Pueblos and completely cut ties to white society.
"'It seems like I already heard these stories before...only thing is, the names sound different. (242)"'
Grandma ending the novel with this phrase is evidence of the intertextuality that is the basis of Ceremony. Silko retells the classic clan/tribe stories that she grew up with through the journey of a "modern" man, or unexpected hero. The many layers of tradition and stories that make up this novel are really what makes this such a revered piece of Native American literature.
Saturday, April 5, 2014
Response to Course Material 03/16
These past couple of weeks have been filled with a few new activities and we have finally ended the discussion of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead.
The class broke into groups to take a multiple choice test. The passages were tricky, but my group and I were able to get through all the questions and (surprisingly) we finished with a decent score. This was reassuring at first, but then I questioned if I would be able to reach the same logic and analyze as well on my own.
The new piece of literature the team is reading is Ceremony by Leslie Marmon Silko. I am interested to read a novel that deals with important Native American stories. Mrs. Holmes created an extensive prezi to provide background story on tribal stories and values of Laguna Pueblos. When I first started reading the novel I had a hard time getting into it and after getting to about 1/3 of the way through, I turned to Sparknotes. I'm sure this is frowned upon by instructors, but it did clear up a lot of questions I had concerning the order of events.
A new activity the class did was thinking back to the plays we had read this year through different lenses. I really liked discussing Death of A Salesmen and trying to comprehend Miller's message of what kind of person does one have to be in order to be successful. I do not remember which lenses caused us to look into the meaning ( Social Darwinism?), but it fostered good discussion. What was difficult for me was understanding what all the different lenses meant and applying the not-so-obvious ones. This is something I would like to study more in class and I think setting time aside to look at every piece of literature we read through each of these lenses would be beneficial for the AP Test.
The class broke into groups to take a multiple choice test. The passages were tricky, but my group and I were able to get through all the questions and (surprisingly) we finished with a decent score. This was reassuring at first, but then I questioned if I would be able to reach the same logic and analyze as well on my own.
The new piece of literature the team is reading is Ceremony by Leslie Marmon Silko. I am interested to read a novel that deals with important Native American stories. Mrs. Holmes created an extensive prezi to provide background story on tribal stories and values of Laguna Pueblos. When I first started reading the novel I had a hard time getting into it and after getting to about 1/3 of the way through, I turned to Sparknotes. I'm sure this is frowned upon by instructors, but it did clear up a lot of questions I had concerning the order of events.
A new activity the class did was thinking back to the plays we had read this year through different lenses. I really liked discussing Death of A Salesmen and trying to comprehend Miller's message of what kind of person does one have to be in order to be successful. I do not remember which lenses caused us to look into the meaning ( Social Darwinism?), but it fostered good discussion. What was difficult for me was understanding what all the different lenses meant and applying the not-so-obvious ones. This is something I would like to study more in class and I think setting time aside to look at every piece of literature we read through each of these lenses would be beneficial for the AP Test.
Sunday, March 9, 2014
OPEN PROMPT II : 3/09
2004. Critic Roland Barthes has said, “Literature is the question minus the answer.” Choose a novel, or play, and, considering Barthes’ observation, write an essay in which you analyze a central question the work raises and the extent to which it offers answers. Explain how the author’s treatment of this question affects your understanding of the work as a whole
Tom Stoppard's Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead has the audience ponder if art mimics life through winding existential monologues and pointing out the differences between actors and humans, but a concrete answer is never given. People often look to literature for answers about life and try to see themselves in the characters, but Ros and Guil are such one dimensional clowns, it is difficult for readers to do so. Ros and Guil are characters extracted from Hamlet who try to take a new direction outside of their "birth" text. However, Stoppard shows readers that because their destiny is already written, they have no free will--the opposite can be said for humans.Therefore, it is possible that Stoppard is suggesting that literature can not possibly reflect the human experience.
Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are so outlandish they can be seen as possible caricatures of humans, but are note true illustrations of human beings. Guildenstern is considered as the deep thinking in the relationship, but when he is trying to find the missing pieces to his being, it is always out of his reach. The reader eventually realizes through the cyclical nature of the play that Guildenstern will never find out who he is and where he comes from because he is simply a character. Something that materialized in William Shakespeare's imagination. Stoppard emphasizes Rosencrantz and Guildenstern's lack of dimension through their meaningless banter, frequently confused identities, and their inability to answer simple questions like "where are you from?" This is done to keep the audience from relating with these characters too much so Stoppard can make his point that literature does not hold the answers to all the mysteries of life and Shakespeare is not God.
In the play, there are clear distinctions made that isolate humans from actors. The Player is the conductor of a traveling troop of actors, called the Tragedians, who act out the events taken place in Hamlet. The job of the actors is to reenact the events of life, which in their specialized field, always ends in death. The same can be said about actual life. The undeniable fate for all humans is death and if the The Players recreate history, it raises the question again ifart does mimic life. However, The Player mentions several times in the play that actors are not people because they die numerous times, while humans have one shot at life.Most of the play follows Rosencrantz and Guildenstern making futile attempts to understand their purpose in life, but in the end as they face their death, they realize that they their "death" does not terminate their existence. They simply are just disappearing for awhile until someone reads/watches one of their plays again. This dramatic truth Stoppard tells his audience is put out for their consideration, but there is not a real closing argument given that makes the audience positive that this is what Stoppard believes.
Stoppard's play introduces several questions and ideas for the audience to ruminate, but he is careful to not make any conclusions. This can be very frustrating to readers who feel that every piece of literature must include a grand overarching meaning that everyone should take away from it. However, that is part of the genius behind this play. The absurd characters, insignificant settings, and overlapping plots go to show what little literature and reality have in common. Therefore, if literature does not provide the answers to life, Stoppard takes that irony by writing an existentialist play and ending it without a single impressive question he raised.
Tom Stoppard's Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead has the audience ponder if art mimics life through winding existential monologues and pointing out the differences between actors and humans, but a concrete answer is never given. People often look to literature for answers about life and try to see themselves in the characters, but Ros and Guil are such one dimensional clowns, it is difficult for readers to do so. Ros and Guil are characters extracted from Hamlet who try to take a new direction outside of their "birth" text. However, Stoppard shows readers that because their destiny is already written, they have no free will--the opposite can be said for humans.Therefore, it is possible that Stoppard is suggesting that literature can not possibly reflect the human experience.
Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are so outlandish they can be seen as possible caricatures of humans, but are note true illustrations of human beings. Guildenstern is considered as the deep thinking in the relationship, but when he is trying to find the missing pieces to his being, it is always out of his reach. The reader eventually realizes through the cyclical nature of the play that Guildenstern will never find out who he is and where he comes from because he is simply a character. Something that materialized in William Shakespeare's imagination. Stoppard emphasizes Rosencrantz and Guildenstern's lack of dimension through their meaningless banter, frequently confused identities, and their inability to answer simple questions like "where are you from?" This is done to keep the audience from relating with these characters too much so Stoppard can make his point that literature does not hold the answers to all the mysteries of life and Shakespeare is not God.
In the play, there are clear distinctions made that isolate humans from actors. The Player is the conductor of a traveling troop of actors, called the Tragedians, who act out the events taken place in Hamlet. The job of the actors is to reenact the events of life, which in their specialized field, always ends in death. The same can be said about actual life. The undeniable fate for all humans is death and if the The Players recreate history, it raises the question again ifart does mimic life. However, The Player mentions several times in the play that actors are not people because they die numerous times, while humans have one shot at life.Most of the play follows Rosencrantz and Guildenstern making futile attempts to understand their purpose in life, but in the end as they face their death, they realize that they their "death" does not terminate their existence. They simply are just disappearing for awhile until someone reads/watches one of their plays again. This dramatic truth Stoppard tells his audience is put out for their consideration, but there is not a real closing argument given that makes the audience positive that this is what Stoppard believes.
Stoppard's play introduces several questions and ideas for the audience to ruminate, but he is careful to not make any conclusions. This can be very frustrating to readers who feel that every piece of literature must include a grand overarching meaning that everyone should take away from it. However, that is part of the genius behind this play. The absurd characters, insignificant settings, and overlapping plots go to show what little literature and reality have in common. Therefore, if literature does not provide the answers to life, Stoppard takes that irony by writing an existentialist play and ending it without a single impressive question he raised.
Thursday, March 6, 2014
Summary and Analysis : Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead
Author
Tom Stoppard co-wrote the screenplays for Brazil, The Russia House and Shakespeare in Love, and has received one Academy Award and four Tony Awards. Themes of human rights, censorship and political freedom pervade his work along with exploration of linguistics and philosophy. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead was Stoppard's first play to receive significant recognition.
Setting
The story begins in " a place without any visible character" (pg. 11) during Elizabethan times. The two main characters also spend time in Shakespeare's fictional castle, Elsinore, and on a ship at sea.
Characters
Rosencrantz-
Guildenstern's traveling companion and best friend. In Elsinore, he is recognized as on of Hamlet's best friends and is given a task to find out why Hamlet has been acting so depressed lately. Rosencrantz appears more dim than Guildenstern, but also has an unique curiosity and seems overall more content with life than his friend.
Guildenstern
Rosencrantz's traveling companion and best friend. He has pretty much all the same characteristics as Rosencrantz to the point that people always get confused between the two. Guil is very frustrated with the lack of answers there are about who he is, what his purpose is, and what will happen when he dies.
The Player
He is the conductor or leading actor of his own traveling company. He makes a lot of sexual innuendos and offers Ros and Guil a "show" in the beginning of the play. He seems like the all knowing character and acts as a guide to Ros and Guil and already know what their fate will be. He also points out the many differences between actors and regular humans.
Tragedians
The actors in The Player's traveling caravan of actors. Alfred in a particular actor who is singled out as meek, exploited, and a victim to the moral declination of art. The Tragedians end every play with a gruesome/tragic death and several time through out the play act out scenes from Hamlet. There is a theory that the entire play is actually performed by the Tragedians and R&G are unaware that they are acting too.
Other Characters from Hamlet
The characters include the tragic play's regular gang: Hamlet, Ophelia, Claudius, Gertrude, Polonius, and Horatio. The lines are word for word from Shakespeare's original play and they are not affected by Rosencrantz and Guildenstern's confused state and only acknowledge their presence in the scenes where it was already written (when they interacted with characters in Hamlet). There are theories that these parts are played by the Tragedians and the whole story takes place on The Player's caravan.
Plot
- Ros and Guil are traveling by horse through an unidentifiable place. Ros is flipping a coin and it lands on heads every time
- All they can remember prior to the moment we first encounter them is being awakened by a messenger
- Hear drumming and see a wagon full of traveling actors (The Player & Tragedians)
- The Player indirectly offers R &G an erotic show (that they can "take part in"). Once Guildenstern realizes what The Player is suggesting he is disgusted by the troop however, R&G beat The Player in a coin toss and request a classic tragedy performance as their prize.
- The Player moves his foot that was covering the coin and Ros discovers that it miraculously landed on tails. This marks a significant shift in events and setting for the play.
- R&G get on the actors' wagon and the lighting changes and R&G end up in Elsinore in the plot of Hamlet
- They arrive in perfect time when Gertrude and Claudius call upon them to find out what "afflicts" their dear Hamlet.
- They wait for Hamlet to find them.
- They discuss what could possibly be bothering Hamlet and they flat out discuss how complicated and backwards his family is, but do not diagnosis it as the reason for his madness.
- The players arrive to Elsinore to preform the "Murder of Gonzago",upon Hamlet's request. The Player tries to explain to R&G about why they are there and to accept the truths around them.
- R&G play the question game
- After the disastrous play, Claudius sends Hamlet off to England with R&G following him closely behind.
- The setting/time shifts and R&G find themselves in a dark space, later discovering they are inside a boat
- Ros and Guil try to remember where they last left off, Ros contemplates if he even wants to go to England, and they happen to read Claudius' note to the King that orders Hamlet to be killed in England.
- R&G got to bed and Hamlet swaps out the letter overnight with a new one that orders R&G to be murdered.
- Cue Pirates
- R&G think that the whole trip pointless because Hamlet escaped. They open the letter to read to The Player and are stunned when they read that they are supposed to be put to death. They complain to The Player that they didn't get enough time and are confused by what their untimely death sentence means.
- The Player demonstrates how actors are the master of death because people believe an acted death more than a literal one.
- Guild decides that dying means nothing and is simply the "absence of presence" and Ros admits that he is relieved that he is about to die.
- Their last lines are inconclusive and suggests that they have another shot at life in the future and they disappear from the stage.
- There is not a lot of description given about the appearance of the stage or characters. It can lead the reader to think that the characters are roaming around in a featureless, surreal place.
- In ACT I when R&G are playing the question game, they keep track of points like a tennis match. This paired with the constant back and forth fashion of the game mimic a real tennis match.
Symbolism
- In the beginning, every time Ros or Guil flip a coin hundreds of times, and every time it lands on heads. When The Player arrives and invites them on his cart for a play, the coin is found tails up. This marks a moment of change.
- Guildenstern's bag of coins is described as half empty and Ros' half full. This provides some insight on their contrasting demeanor and perspectives on life.
- England could be thought of as Heaven and the King of England as God
- The boat could represent the motion of life to accentuate that R&G are getting closer to their ultimate fate, and are agreeing to not take serious control of the direction of their life.
Quotes
"Ros: Am I dead?
Guil: Yes of no?
Ros: Is there a choice?
Guil: Is there a God?" (Stoppard 43)
These questions hint at the main questions many people feel this play is asking or the ones Stoppard is waving in front of the audience to make a decision about. After reading this play, I really do not know if the work answers any of these questions except, that people do not have a choice if they die or not.
"truth is only that which is taken to be true. It's the currency of living. There may be nothing behind it, but it dosen't make any difference so long as it is honoured" (67).
Most of what the Player says is profound and seems important to the meaning of the play. Therefore, I found this quote very interesting seeming how parts of this play seem so bizarre and conflict with the reader's view on reality and what qualifies as normal. I like that his play challenges the audience about what they believe in to a point that almost makes them uncomfortable.
Sunday, February 16, 2014
Response To Course Material 2/16
Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead
Over the past few weeks, the AP Lit classes have been reading Tom Stoppard's play that led to existential discussions of the play's meaning and the commentary it makes on life. To be honest, the only thing I got from this play was perhaps the irony of its existence.
Hamlet is considered one of the greatest plays ever written because it poses many questions about what it means to be human. Stoppard's goal (in my eyes) for writing Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead was to make the point that Shakespeare is not God. He makes his point by taking the least significant characters from Hamlet and writing a play full of open questions. At first glance, the play seems merely the story of two babbling, directionless messengers for Elsinore. But this idea will not do for the intellectual crowd.Stoppard must be making a ground breaking existential discovery, right?
It is hard to say that Stoppard had no intentions of making a statement with his play, but the message does not enter anything too philosophical. He knew he could conduct the attention of an intellectual audience who would spend money to watch this play over and over, and write essays trying to answer the "big question." I believe the point of Stoppard's play is that humans are incapable of finding that answer in actual life and his play. Yet, here we are trying to crack the code anyway.
During our last class discussion, fellow classmates began to reach similar conclusions to mine that their is no meaning to the play. Ms. Holmes said that reaching this realization meant we were making headway in our discussion, which seems so odd to me. We think their is no significance to the play, however there is still more to uncover? I am looking forward to our next discussions and what more meaning my classmates will dig up because I am fresh out of ideas.
Lecture on Stoppard, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead by Ian Johnston
Ian Johnston's essay discussed the possible categories Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead could fall under with evidence from the play and film. It is always nice to hear articulate opinions about literature you have read and I found some of Johnston's points interesting. However, most of it just reminded me of my class discussions. We hit on a lot of the points Johnston does, and end them the same too--open ended and without any conclusions. This author wrote his essay in the contradicting, non conclusive style of Stoppard's play. At first I was irritated that the essay did not wrap up nicely, but it opened my eyes too. My class could not find or agree on an overall conclusion of what this play is about, and neither could this established author and critic. So, what does this mean? "I'm not going to answer that. After all, times being what they are...."
Film
The film adaptation, directed by Tom Stoppard, was really well done. How can you argue with a film that was directed by the author of the play it is based off. I specifically loved the part where the player's all wore masks when they reenacted Old Hamlet's murder. The player's portrayed the notorious story through what seemed like a lyrical dance. There were some clear differences between the film and play as well. The one that sticks out the most is the closing scenes of the players packing up their caravan in the woods after Ros and Guil are hung. My AP Lit pals and I discussed how this ending was similar to when the character wakes up and realizes it was all just a dream. Another interesting point in the film was how Rosencrantz would unknowingly make scientific discoveries (e.g. water displacement/volume). His child-like curiosity made me think that Stoppard was making a comment on how children are happier in life because they have no interest in understanding why they are alive. They are content with just living.
Open Prompt Assistance
Ms. Holmes thought the introductory paragraphs of out open prompts needed some serious fine tuning, so we dedicated a portion of class to revisit the basics of writing intros. I appreciate the class time we put aside to prepare for the upcoming AP Lit test and the first day of the lesson was helpful. I realized I wasted a lot of time reading the "how to write" documents instead of getting right to work like most of my classmates.
Over the past few weeks, the AP Lit classes have been reading Tom Stoppard's play that led to existential discussions of the play's meaning and the commentary it makes on life. To be honest, the only thing I got from this play was perhaps the irony of its existence.
Hamlet is considered one of the greatest plays ever written because it poses many questions about what it means to be human. Stoppard's goal (in my eyes) for writing Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead was to make the point that Shakespeare is not God. He makes his point by taking the least significant characters from Hamlet and writing a play full of open questions. At first glance, the play seems merely the story of two babbling, directionless messengers for Elsinore. But this idea will not do for the intellectual crowd.Stoppard must be making a ground breaking existential discovery, right?
It is hard to say that Stoppard had no intentions of making a statement with his play, but the message does not enter anything too philosophical. He knew he could conduct the attention of an intellectual audience who would spend money to watch this play over and over, and write essays trying to answer the "big question." I believe the point of Stoppard's play is that humans are incapable of finding that answer in actual life and his play. Yet, here we are trying to crack the code anyway.
During our last class discussion, fellow classmates began to reach similar conclusions to mine that their is no meaning to the play. Ms. Holmes said that reaching this realization meant we were making headway in our discussion, which seems so odd to me. We think their is no significance to the play, however there is still more to uncover? I am looking forward to our next discussions and what more meaning my classmates will dig up because I am fresh out of ideas.
Lecture on Stoppard, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead by Ian Johnston
Ian Johnston's essay discussed the possible categories Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead could fall under with evidence from the play and film. It is always nice to hear articulate opinions about literature you have read and I found some of Johnston's points interesting. However, most of it just reminded me of my class discussions. We hit on a lot of the points Johnston does, and end them the same too--open ended and without any conclusions. This author wrote his essay in the contradicting, non conclusive style of Stoppard's play. At first I was irritated that the essay did not wrap up nicely, but it opened my eyes too. My class could not find or agree on an overall conclusion of what this play is about, and neither could this established author and critic. So, what does this mean? "I'm not going to answer that. After all, times being what they are...."
Film
The film adaptation, directed by Tom Stoppard, was really well done. How can you argue with a film that was directed by the author of the play it is based off. I specifically loved the part where the player's all wore masks when they reenacted Old Hamlet's murder. The player's portrayed the notorious story through what seemed like a lyrical dance. There were some clear differences between the film and play as well. The one that sticks out the most is the closing scenes of the players packing up their caravan in the woods after Ros and Guil are hung. My AP Lit pals and I discussed how this ending was similar to when the character wakes up and realizes it was all just a dream. Another interesting point in the film was how Rosencrantz would unknowingly make scientific discoveries (e.g. water displacement/volume). His child-like curiosity made me think that Stoppard was making a comment on how children are happier in life because they have no interest in understanding why they are alive. They are content with just living.
Open Prompt Assistance
Ms. Holmes thought the introductory paragraphs of out open prompts needed some serious fine tuning, so we dedicated a portion of class to revisit the basics of writing intros. I appreciate the class time we put aside to prepare for the upcoming AP Lit test and the first day of the lesson was helpful. I realized I wasted a lot of time reading the "how to write" documents instead of getting right to work like most of my classmates.
Saturday, February 8, 2014
Open Prompt : 2005
In Kate Chopin’s The Awakening (1899), protagonist Edna Pontellier is said to possess “That outward existence which conforms, the inward life that questions.” In a novel or play that you have studied, identify a character who outwardly conforms while questioning inwardly. Then write an essay in which you analyze how this tension between outward conformity and inward questioning contributes to the meaning of the work.
George Orwell's 1984 follows a thirty year old man named Winston Smith who has been living the majority of his adult life in a harsh, oppressive society. This dystopian novel deals with many ideas and raises questions about what it means to be a civilized human. One important part the novel deals with is illustrating the dangers of questioning society due to extensive surveillance and the inability to trust other people.
The heavy surveillance in Winston's society makes him very paranoid about letting his rebellious thoughts seep into his outer appearance. One of Winston's biggest fears is being caught by the Thought Police-- watch for citizens that are "different" and "vaporize" them. To avoid being vaporized, Winston demonstrates a lot of self-control to mimic behavior of his submissive comrades while in public, knowing the Police were watching his every move. One day Winston ventures to a district near his apartment where the Police have little control and the people remember a time before Big Brother. He finds an old antique shop run by an elderly man named Mr. Charrington and finds what he thinks to be his own safe haven away from the government's watchful eye. In the antique shop, Winston and his lover Julia are swept up in subversive activities such as learning about the past, wearing make-up, and intercourse. However, toward the end of the novel, the Thought Police invades the antique shop and they discover they were being watched the whole time. The novel suggests that in a powerful government, alternative thinkers have nowhere to hide but inside themselves--which is nearly impossible to do.
In Winston's society, citizens are groomed to look homogeneous making it very difficult for Winston to differentiate between fellow free-thinkers from government spies. Winston must behave like a law abiding citizen, but he is desperately looking from someone he can share his subversive desires with. When he meets O'Brien, Winston believes his prayers have been answered and looks to him as a mentor. Despite this, O'Brien turns out to be a spy for the government and betrays him. O'Brien is one example of how it is impossible as an alternative thinker to find solace in an oppressive government because everyone is concerned with their own self-interest.
In 1984, Winston is constantly trying to conceal the fact that his is different and questions the government. The novel suggests that once one is part of a controlling government, they can never resist it or get out. This is mainly due the majority fear of being labeled an outsider. Winston thought he had found a partner in law breaking with Julia, but in the face of the government, she abandoned him. Orwell makes the point that it is impossible to conform outwardly and harbor alternative ideas while functioning like a normal human. If one tries to "look" the part, either their personal ideologies will conform, or their differences will reveal themselves. Either way, it will end tragically.
George Orwell's 1984 follows a thirty year old man named Winston Smith who has been living the majority of his adult life in a harsh, oppressive society. This dystopian novel deals with many ideas and raises questions about what it means to be a civilized human. One important part the novel deals with is illustrating the dangers of questioning society due to extensive surveillance and the inability to trust other people.
The heavy surveillance in Winston's society makes him very paranoid about letting his rebellious thoughts seep into his outer appearance. One of Winston's biggest fears is being caught by the Thought Police-- watch for citizens that are "different" and "vaporize" them. To avoid being vaporized, Winston demonstrates a lot of self-control to mimic behavior of his submissive comrades while in public, knowing the Police were watching his every move. One day Winston ventures to a district near his apartment where the Police have little control and the people remember a time before Big Brother. He finds an old antique shop run by an elderly man named Mr. Charrington and finds what he thinks to be his own safe haven away from the government's watchful eye. In the antique shop, Winston and his lover Julia are swept up in subversive activities such as learning about the past, wearing make-up, and intercourse. However, toward the end of the novel, the Thought Police invades the antique shop and they discover they were being watched the whole time. The novel suggests that in a powerful government, alternative thinkers have nowhere to hide but inside themselves--which is nearly impossible to do.
In Winston's society, citizens are groomed to look homogeneous making it very difficult for Winston to differentiate between fellow free-thinkers from government spies. Winston must behave like a law abiding citizen, but he is desperately looking from someone he can share his subversive desires with. When he meets O'Brien, Winston believes his prayers have been answered and looks to him as a mentor. Despite this, O'Brien turns out to be a spy for the government and betrays him. O'Brien is one example of how it is impossible as an alternative thinker to find solace in an oppressive government because everyone is concerned with their own self-interest.
In 1984, Winston is constantly trying to conceal the fact that his is different and questions the government. The novel suggests that once one is part of a controlling government, they can never resist it or get out. This is mainly due the majority fear of being labeled an outsider. Winston thought he had found a partner in law breaking with Julia, but in the face of the government, she abandoned him. Orwell makes the point that it is impossible to conform outwardly and harbor alternative ideas while functioning like a normal human. If one tries to "look" the part, either their personal ideologies will conform, or their differences will reveal themselves. Either way, it will end tragically.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)