Philosophy is a means of establishing order and purpose in a bewildering world, and perhaps establish a guiding principle for one's actions. One need not be a philosopher nor even think consciously about it in order to have a philosophy. Speech and actions reflect
"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio / Than are dreamt of in your philosophy…" says Hamlet to his practical friend (I,v). The Prince is probably hardest to pin down—his world is out of balance and he struggles to make sense of it, to decide what he should do.
It's worth a try to understand Hamlet's changing view of his world by considering his views and the views of those around him. Choose two of the major characters of Shakespeare's tragedy and discuss them in light of their philosophy.
47 comments:
Hamlet believes "make it fun and you'll get it done" (Cayton). That's why hamlet doesn't just kill Claudius. He holds a play first. This is kind of a joke, I don't have my sheet right now and I just asked my friend what a good ideology was.
I am not entirely sure about this but I would place Polonius as a cynic because of how he goes about doing things. His advice for Laertes and Ophelia seemed to be all about what he thought and he didn't take the time to have a conversations with either of them, he just lectured both of them. He made not see that he is doing that but it seems selfish. The way he explains Hamlet's love for Ophelia makes it seem that he believes Hamlet's actions to be selfish. This would follow the description of a cynic which states selfishness motivates human actions. I would place Horatio as a pragmastist maybe?? He just seems like the most 'normal' character if that would a fitting term. He takes things as they are and he understands Hamlet for who he is.
may not made!
Well maybe I should have looked over what I wrote before I pressed post comment... be* a fitting term. left that out. woops
Sarah—I think the right word is "whoops."
Actually: "Whoops!" has more of the right spirit.
(Though sometimes I just say, "oops…")
Nice one Sarah...I hate it when that happens XD.
Prince Hamlet, I have found, is a strong idealist. According to the handout, he is "one who cherishes or prusues high or noble principles, purposes, goals, etc." Hamlet displays this on multiple occasions. Overall, he seeks to avenge the cruel murder of his father at the hands of his brother, a noble cause in the context of the era. He also despises the marriage of his mother to this murderer, Claudius. Hamlet cherishes the union of his mother to only one man, his father, and resents her deviation from his opinions. In another definition of "idealist," Hamlet is "one who represents things as they might or should be rather than as they are." Claudius might in fact be a good king for Denmark, as we discussed on Wednesday. He is a clever politician and not afraid to protect his country. However, Hamlet is focused on the issue of his father's murder and his mother's "incestuous" marriage, not necissarily the whole picture (a personal note, might I add, often characteristic of idealists). Denmark and its future is the thing that simply "is," while Hamlet longs for what he beleives it should be: still ruled by his mighty father.
Horatio strikes me as a realist. Not easily swayed by emotion, he tends to see clearly in even the wildest of circumstances. At the sight of the Ghost, Horatio takes precautions based on physicality. He warns Hamlet of the dangerous possibilities the Ghost's appearance may bring. His advise stems from a solid grounding in reality, remaining loyal to his friend but acting somewhat of Hamlet's advisor. To Horatio, the Ghost has not been proven to be what it says it is. Evidence is the cheif deciding factor. I think this is Horatio intrigues me so much. He's a very logical, reliable guy.
Hahaha. This made me laugh :) My apologies... Whoops!
Claudius I feel is a bit of a hedonist in that he regards his wants and needs above all else. Everything he does is mostly for his own benefit or enjoyment and this can be seen in his day to day life. He takes pleasure in drinking and partying at banquets, a trait Prince Hamlet despises. Claudius even goes so far as to kill his own brother not only for the title of king, but out of love for his brother's wife. His selfish and indulgent actions reflects those of a hedonist, whose doctrine is solely self-gratification.
The Ghost of King Hamlet, Claudius's foil, would be a cynic. Given he does represent King Hamlet who was murdered by his own brother, he is still rather cynical when talking about Claudius. The Ghost shows contempt towards not only his treacherous brother but also his "seeming most-virtuous Queen" for marrying Claudius not long after his death. The Ghost feels betrayed, even though Gertrude was technically a widow when she remarried. He also speaks ill of how Claudius seduced Gertrude after his death. The Ghost goes so far as to suggest that Prince Hamlet should avenge his death and that this is the only reasonable solution.
I would call Horatio a realist. When he is first told of the ghost of Denmark partying it up around Elsinore, he doesn't believe it and demands evidence to prove that the ghost is real. only then does he believe there is something rotten in the state of Denmark.
I would porbably also call Hamlet an Idealist and a Cynic. He maintains childish ideals of what he believes right and sticks with them. He makes fun of Claudius because he likes to relax and have large banquets to indulge himself and Gertrude which Hamlet despises. Hamlet also shows this unique combination of beliefs when he confronts Gertrude in her bedchamber and they have their whole discussion about Claudius.
I guess I'll talk about the women. I mean, we need the women right? They aren't completely out of it like Marlow might say.
I think Gertrude would be an idealist. Not because her morals are incredible, but because of the last two definitions of an Idealist on the paper. "A visionary or impractical person, or one who represents things as they might or should be rather than as they are". Being married to the brother of the man she loves, she would dream about how things should be in her opinion. She also is, in a way, naive. She excepts the story about the king being bitten by a snake, she doesn't question Claudius when he has people spy on Hamlet, and she doesn't want to think ill of her son. She chooses to see what she wants to see in the situation. In a way, I'd say she's also a little bit of a Hedonist. She's driven to achieve what will make her happy without thinking about consequences, like her son being devastated. However, I'm not sure she's necessarily only interested in pleasure for pleasure's sake like it says on the back. I guess I might be confused as to what Hedonism is exactly haha.
Ophelia. Oh Ophelia. I think it's hard to nail down exactly what she is, mostly because she goes insane halfway through the play and you have to think about what she was like BEFORE things went...let's say awry. When Laertes gives her advice as to how to behave with Hamlet, she quickly answers back saying that he better heed his own advice. She's a little cynical, but at the same time, she's obedient and hopeful. She's a little too emotional for me to feel comfortable labeling her a realist. She's a little bit of an idealist, a cynic, and a pragmatist. She might be cynical and wish for different circumstances, but I think she's also practical and has good morals. When her father and brother give her orders, she obeys them, and overall, she really strives to do what is right.
I think Horatio is a pragmatist. He seems to keep Hamlet grounded. Someone Hamlet can go to to see what is real, and how to handle a situation. As Katie says he is a reliable guy. Dictionary.com defined this philosophy as, "matter-of-fact way of approaching or assessing situations or of solving problems." I feel that Horatio embraces this.
I would also call Claudius a hedonist. With his love for partying and smooth talking attitude he seems to not care about his consequences and lives in the now. He does things for him, aka killing his brother so he could take his place. He tries to act like he cares about Hamlet but he didn't have the decency to wait a little longer take what he wanted (marrying his mother) he had to do it right away because that is how it best suited him.
I would consider Polonius a pragmatist(?). He often goes by his gut feeling and is quick to come to what he would consider practical conclusions. Like when Hamlet frightens Ophelia he quickly jumps to the simple conlusion that Hamlet is just madly in love with Ophelia. This is how Hamlet is able to trick him so easily, he fails to look outside the box and Hamlet is able to create situations in which he will assume Hamlet is up to one thing, while his real goal is something completely different. However, the way Polonius speaks to his children is very cynical, often telling them to stray away from the social norms and look into themselves for support.
Laertes seems to be a full blown cynic. He is quick to assume the worst in society and is a man of action. He is not one to look deeper into situations than necessary due to his lack of faith in the rest of the world, like when he warns Ophelia to stay away from Hamlet just because he assumes Hamlet has just targeted Ophelia as the next victim of his womanizing ways.
I believe the young Hamlet to be an idealist, but for different reasons in addition to the ones Katie mentioned. He looks up to his father as the epitome of what a king should be. The elder Hamlet is brave, prideful, and stern. When Claudius inherits the throne as a foil of his brother, Hamlet despises the behavior that he exemplifies as king(the fact that Claudius killed his father and married his mother doesn't help much either). Hamlet is an idealist also because he is rather impractical, acting on passion rather than reason. His plan to avenge his father doesn't seem to forecast much further than the murder of Claudius, a crime for which Hamlet will undoubtedly be held accountable for. This doesn't occur to, or concern, Hamlet though, it only matters that his father's death is avenged.
The elder Hamlet, or perhaps just his ghost, should be labeled a cynic. Not only does he view the actions of others, such as Claudius and Gertrude, as purely selfish, he also adopts this policy himself. When he commands his son to avenge his murder, Hamlet appears to have no one in mind but himself. Gertrude will be left a widow once again, Hamlet likely imprisoned or executed, and Denmark left without a king or proper heir. But hey, Hamlet evens the score with that darn selfish brother. Isn't that all that counts?
As Katie and Emelia described, Hamlet is an idealist due to his unrealistic vision of his father and his lofty and romanticized goal of revenge. I agree with this, but I feel like he is predominantly a cynic. The worksheet says that disillusionment can turn an idealist into a cynic, and think this is what happened to Hamlet after his father’s death and his mother’s hasty remarriage. Hamlet’s cynicism is shown by his hatred of his uncle Claudius, his disgust at his mother’s lustful actions, and his view of Denmark as “a prison” (II, 2, 262).
I think that Ophelia would qualify best as an idealist. She isn’t exactly a visionary, but she does cherish certain “high and noble principles”. She is young and innocent, and very obedient to her father Polonius and brother Laertes. When Hamlet visits her displaying his “antic mask”, Ophelia is deeply upset and worriedly runs to her father. Throughout the story she remains virtuous and naïve, upholding her innocent manner.
I’ll take a stab at Claudius. There’s no question that he’s a shrewd fellow with the gift of words. He knows how to manipulate people in order to gain more power and better his reputation. I would argue that he’s a narcissist; he proves throughout the play to be extremely self-centered, but I see that narcissism is not on the philosophy handout here, so I’m not quite sure if I can categorize him as such! After looking at the list, I would say that Claudius is slightly hedonistic. Hedonism is essentially valuing pleasure above all else, and in a sense that is what Claudius does. Pleasure to him is power and egoism, and that is exactly what the King seeks. Most of his actions throughout the play reflect his own self-interest above others: the most selfish of which being the murder his own brother in order to gain the throne and be with Gertrude. Also, his tendency to eat, drink and be merry further demonstrate Claudius’ hedonistic philosophy.
Horatio is a realist. He believes what his eyes tell him of the world around him and little more. He is slow to believe in the Ghost, but upon seeing it he accepts it.
Hamlet, on the other hand, begins as an idealist. Even as his world falls apart around him he continues to cling to some of these ideals. His general outlook, however, progresses toward cynicism as the play progresses, as demonstrated by his treatment of poor Rosencrantz and doomed Guildenstern. He is a tad pessimistic, also, and does not shy away from sarcasm. Pragmatism occasionally shines through, but not frequently. Ultimately the play progresses due to his lack of pragmatism, his inabillity to adress the problems placed before him.
I see we were asked to analyze TWO major characters. Ah. I like Horatio, so I’ll go with him. He is a friend that I would like to have—trustworthy, faithful, and caring. It’s clear that he cares for his dear friend Hamlet and is willing to stand by his side no matter what. His character seems rather constant. He’s not fickle or flighty or particularly loquacious like some of the other characters. I see him as a pragmatist. He thinks logically and isn’t completely overwhelmed by emotions, his own or others. For instance, when the Ghost bids Hamlet to go away with him, Horatio, being the good friend he is, begs Hamlet not to go with mysterious creature. Here it becomes apparent that Horatio is practical, and much more so than Hamlet is.
Hmm, I just read the other posts. I categorized Horatio as a pragmatist, but many others call him a realist. I'm not quite clear on the difference between the two philosophies. I wonder if anyone else has any thoughts on the difference between a realist and a pragmatist, and Horatio as being one or perhaps both of them?
I consider Horatio to be a pragmatist as well as a realist. He seems like a down-to-earth guy as it took him some convincing from the guards to actually believe that there was a ghostly figure stalking around the castle grounds around midnight. He also is supportive of Hamlet and is seen as Hamlet’s closest friend, knowing that his friend has a reason behind his actions. Horatio seems like the practical type, loyal to Hamlet and at the same time, a pillar of support for Hamlet. It is also Horatio at the end that is entrusted by Hamlet with telling the story.
Hamlet, on the other hand, is a very sophisticated character. Hamlet seems to have a little of each philosophy as part of him. He is more of a cynic and an existentialist. He is extremely philosophical and contemplative, often portrayed by his long soliloquies. He is a person that is hard to figure out, especially by the other characters in the play. Highly intelligent and knowledgeable, Hamlet pursues the single goal of avenging his dead father. He becomes obsessed with this goal and at times can be extremely melancholy, even contemplating about suicide at one point. He also generally looks down on women, holding a low opinion about the world in general, stating that it’s a prison. Hamlet also views Claudius in disgust, believing that he is motivated by selfish actions and is usually disappointed by the others.
It seems that everyone has taken most of my ideas. I would agree with everyone that Claudius is a hedonist. Hamlet mentions that Claudius spends most nights drinking and dancing the night away which doesn’t seem like a practical way to spend your time as King if you plan to get any work done during the day. He merely does what anything that brings pleasure to himself. One example that I don’t think anyone else mentioned is after he listens in on Hamlet and Ophelia’s conversation (selfish in itself) he wants to send Hamlet away to “prevent harm” but in reality he just wants Hamlet out of his way.
I would see the King Hamlet as a cynic, a philosophy on life that he passed to his only son. His ghost says that Claudius killed him to get to his throne and that he seduced Gertrude into marrying him.( If he is right about his brother’s intentions does that truly make him a cynic? We do not know what he believes about everyone else, so we cannot say that he is cynical towards everyone.) Young Hamlet is surely a cynic though. He believes that his mother’s new marriage is incestuous and thinks that everyone is against him and easily suspects his friends of spying on him. Like father, like son I suppose.
(yes, I do realize this is sort of 3 characters)
Bryn, I would agree with you on your categorization of Horatio as a pragmatist. He doesn't want Hamlet to follow the ghost of King Hamlet because he is convinced that it will bring no good, and in the end he was right. The King convinced Hamlet to get revenge on Claudius, something that would have prevented had Hamlet listened to his friend. I would say that he is both though, because he seems like the type to only believe something if he can see it.. making him a realist. He doesnt believe that the ghost is real, but only in Marcellus and Bernardo's imaginations until he sees it himself.
After reading Sarah’s post, I read over the scene where Polonius gives advice (more like orders) to the naïve and innocent Ophelia. From this scene, I agree with Sarah that Polonius is a cynic. At first it might seem as if he was any doting father who was worried for her daughter. However, after Polonius said “you’ll tender me a fool” (I, Sc. 3, 109) it is quite apparent that he worried about his own reputation more than the well-being of his lovely daughter Ophelia. Also, by the definition as given on our handout, a cynic is a person “who disbelieves in selfless acts.” Polonius is convinced that the “love” that Hamlet has shown Ophelia is only from the selfish heat of the moment, and that Hamlet’s words are only hollow promises.
Seeing that no one has categorized Laertes yet, I will take a stab at it. Laertes, in my opinion, is both pragmatic and realistic. From his first lines, Laertes says to the king as a matter of fact that “he came to Denmark to show “his” duty… yet now, that duty is done,” and because he no longer serves a purpose in Denmark he wishes to return to France (I, Sc. 2, 53). Knowing that he has no practical purpose, he does not want to waste him time when it could be better spent elsewhere. Also, we can assume that Laertes sincerely cares for his sister Ophelia. However, when she tells him about Hamlet, he is not afraid to bluntly put out the hurtful truth of being with a prince. Laertes realistically recognizes that his sister will easily get hurt by a man who has to put his obligations to his country before anything else. Laertes has a straight forward mind that sees things as the way they are, and he is not afraid to bluntly comment on what is realistic and practical to those around him.
Like a few above, I feel Hamlet is an idealist. When he imagines his father, he sees him flawless, and perfect, contrasting directly with Gertrude’s image of the passed king, which as his wife would have been quite different. Although Hamlet is an idealist, I get a sense as the story goes on that he is turning in to a existentialist; with his self-imposed isolation from the ones he know and loves. The want to avenge his father’s death drives this isolation, the want to see his father’s death made right, and honor returned to the throne stemming from his deep idealistic tendencies. You can see this existentialism when his two friends Rosencrantz and Guildenstern come to visit; Hamlet automatically knows they had been sent for, acting almost paranoid, instead of just enjoying their company. The further he isolates himself from the outside world, the more he loses touch of it, residing in his mind, where his father still exists, but in ghost form.
I agree with Callie, Ophelia seems to be all the philosophies at once. I think in the beginning of the play I would have categorized her as a pragmatist. When Hamlet visits her, all eschew, she is shocked and bewildered at his actions and manner, and leads me to think of her as proper and practical, not liking to see someone so distressed. On the other, after her father dies, one could say she goes in to a state of existentialism. She withdraws completely from the outside world, and goes crazy with grief. I think the death of her father and her confusion of her father leads her to insanity, and eventually suicide, because her practical world had cracked.
Claudius: pramatist
Claudius values the ends, not the means. He desires the success of his actions. Though planning an attack on Fortinbras would defend the country’s honor, Claudius engages in diplomacy with Norway because that appears the course of action that will nullify the threat. He engages in what King Hamlet would have seen as a weak action, because it is practical. On a grander scale, Claudius engages morally despicable actions to be crowned king and marry Gertrude: murder and deceit. This is foreboding – if murder is in play, almost any “mean” is available. Finally, rather than confronting Hamlet about his madness, and possibly cause a scene while receiving no useful information, Claudius sets Hamlet’s friends to be spies.
Claudius is not hedonistic – the evidence Bryn produces does relate to pleasure, but disregards his diplomatic actions. Also, the descriptions of Claudius’ actions come from a bitter angry Hamlet. Claudius contains more calculating tendencies than the impulsive hedonist; he did plan in advance and execute Claudius’ murder in cold blood. Labeling Claudius as hedonistic overly simplifies his murder of King Hamlet.
Horotio: realist
Horatio expresses disbelief at the idea of a ghost, and requires valid evidence on which to found belief. For him, this is personal visual evidence. He also states fact, rather than interpreting. After seeing the ghost he is no longer skeptical of the existence of the apparition, but he still does not state with certainty that the ghost is the dead King: “I think I saw him yesternight.” In response to Hamlet’s sour remarks about a funeral-wedding combo plan, Horatio also returns to the facts: “it [the wedding] followed hard upon”. He does sound like an excellent advisor, as Katie suggests – tempering Hamlet’s passionate and idealistic nature. (another example of how the two men are foils of one another). I also wonder about the distinction between pragmatist and realist, as Bryn does, but in this context I assumed that pragmatist left more room for moral ambiguity and requires evidence that methods were chosen on the sole merit of their ability to ensure success.
I think that Gertrude is partly a realist and partly an idealist. She is, for the most part, practical, as shown when she chastises Polonius for being so obnoxious and wordy with his description of her supposedly insane son. However, Gertrude does allow herself to be swept off her feet by Claudius, which shows that she does believe in people and is not cynical or mistrusting. As Callie said, she accepts the story about the snake because she trusts people and believes the best of them.
Hamlet shares the trait of idealism with his mother: he worships his father as if he were a god, refusing to think badly of him and unable to figure out why Gertrude would want to marry anybody else, let alone Claudius. He also has very black-and-white, romantic ideas about things like revenge, and does not consider the consequences for actions that he thinks are the right things to do, but would probably be persecuted for doing. I think he is also a bit of a cynic--he is disillusioned after his discussion with his father, and has lost much of his faith in mankind.
So I sorta want to argue against what Kendra said about Claudius being a Hedonist. I do agree with the fact that he likes to have fun and doesn't care about much else but I don't think his drinking habits and partying truly mean he thinks happiness is the highest good. He's really just selfish. Maybe hes a cynic? His actions are based upon his wants and desires, he doesn't take care to think of others. Like marrying Gertrude so soon and well marrying his late brother's widow in general...
As for the deceased King Hamlet, I think he is an idealist. We do not know much about him but through young Hamlet's eyes he is this noble and visionary man. Young Hamlet idolizes him. I think it is right to say he could have been an idealist. If young hamlet views him in this mighty way, he (king hamlet) must have been this noble man who longed for bigger things and I do think he represents a mightier person than he really was. In the last blog we talked about how Gertrude might have fallen so easily for Claudius because she maybe found him more relaxed than King Hamlet. Someone pointed out that he probably spent a lot more time with Gertrude than he did with young Hamlet and Gertrude probably witnessed King Hamlets flaws and young Hamlet did not. Even so, Hamlet views him as his hero and in that way i think King Hamlet let people view him highly and as a better man than he might have been. AKA he was an idealist.
Hamlet is sarcastic. He is always taking jabs at those he dislikes. When Claudius greets Hamlet, Hamlet replies with a pun laced with his anger and confusion at Claudius's and Gertrude's marriage. He even rebukes his mom when she says "seems", because his grief is not only for show. He also mocks Polonius. When Polonius asks what Hamlet is reading, Hamlet replies by describing Polonius in an insulting manner. Later, when Polonius asks to "take my leave", Hamlet retorts that Polonius can't take anything away from himself, except his life. Hamlet is also sort of a realist. Although the ghost tells Hamlet that it was Claudius who cowardly killed the king with poison, Hamlet still wants physical evidence that it really was his uncle. Since Hamlet doesn't really know if the ghost is actually the elder Hamlet or just an apparition from Hell, he confirms it by plotting to put on a play that will prove if Claudius is the murderer, by playing on his guild.
On the other hand, Claudius is a hedonist. He loves his drink and his parties, and Hamlet is always making fun of his uncle's actions. He is also a pragmatist and finds ways to get what he wants. Seeking the throne of Denmark, Claudius stops at no ends. He kills the elder Hamlet, weds Hamlet's former wife, and uses his gift of gab. As one for practicality, Claudius uses diplomacy against Fortinbras instead of brawn, so that no life will be lost for a wasteful cause.
I agree with the sheet of paper that was passed out to us. I placed Hamlet under existentialism. Like the reader, Hamlet himself doesn’t seem to know who he truly is. He knows what he ought to do ― avenge his father ― but he himself is not completely sure about the situation. According to the timeline given in class, there is a gap that marks Hamlet’s planning for the revenge, which should be noted has hesitancy. He has freely chosen (to an extent) that he should avenge his father and be accounted for the consequences.
Laertes is s cynic. He thinks that Hamlet is using Ophelia right out from the start which is “believing that only selfishness motivates human actions,” instead of considering that Hamlet could be in love with her. He is very quick to jump to the worst conclusions; upon hearing the death of his father, he believes it is Claudius and assembles some troops.
Wait are these two foils of each other?
I read only a couple of these posts because I feel like I should contribute to this blog, not get the ideas from other and strengthen their arguments. At least this way, I know that this is totally and independently my thoughts. I'll probably take time to go back and comment on specific posts / ideas.
Prince Hamlet -- I believe that Prince Hamlet is an existentialist, an idealist, and a cynic. Really, one could make a case for all of the philosophies for Hamlet. He is strongest as an Idealist and Existentialist and then a Cynic.
As an idealist, his vision for his father is of the highest regard. He sees his father as a perfect, Hyperion Lord. He even states that (just like our discussion about King Hamlet and Claudius) Hamlet is "[s]o excellent a king; that was, to this, / Hyperion to a satyr." and even go as far as believe that he is inferior to his father even though they are from the same bloodline, "My father's brother, but no more like my father / Than I to Hercules" (I.ii.145-146, I.ii.159-160). While, in truth, King Hamlet is probably not the most perfect individual (since his wife fell in love with his brother), Hamlet still holds onto idealism that his father was the most wonderful man in the world.
Yet, while he is an idealist, he is also cynical towards women, believing that they are treacherous and immoral. After learning about his mother's incest relationship with his uncle (incest during his time), his mind has the notion that all women are just like his mother (I want to say that he called her something that meant the same thing as a whore -- but I can't find the lines). He also tells his love, Ophelia, that he does not love her anymore. He tell Ophelia, "I loved you not." Now, whether or not that's part of his plan to make sure that Ophelia isn't dragged into this mess (ha! like that's not going to happen), it clearly states that Hamlet does not love Ophelia anymore (this is out of context, sorry). So I think his encounter with the Ghost made him into a cynical person towards women.
And finally, he is an existentialist because he puts himself in isolation to think about a lot of things about his life and life in general. In the play/movie that we saw the other class, he had this whole speech (that I can't remember) where he is by himself, talking his way through life. A better example would be his famous "To-Be-Or-Not-To-Be" soliloquy where he contemplates living life, whether it is better to end life or to suffer through it.
Hamlet is an extremely complicated person. He shows so many sides to him. Adapation? Maybe. But he's definitely, for sure, not a one-sided character.
NOTE: I'm so sorry! I'll do the second character when I get back from making errands! I wanted to post BEFORE 10:00 (or before midnight or whatnot) and NOT be the last one to post. Second character philosophy analysis later to come tonight.
As the piece of paper that this personage called "Keli Zhou" claims to agree with, I must flatly object (this is the only way that we sheets CAN object)!
We of the paper world are not used to human beings agreeing with us.
Hmmmm…
I suppose most of the other fellows in the ream agree with me on most paper issues.
In fact, now that I think about it (if I COULD think, which I doubt (if in fact I can either think OR doubt, which I doubt…oh well!) ) — ALL of the other fellows in the ream are exactly like me: nearly two-dimensional, white, faintly fibrous, finished handsomely with straight edges and 90º angles.
The only discernible difference between me and my brethren is the inky black set of characters that a wretched noisy machine imprinted upon myself before this Ms. Zhou got ahold of me. The entire matter really is distasteful.
If you units of humanity insist upon agreeing with something, agree with the inky characters! I prefer to be left alone until the Day of Recycling is at hand.
And what is this talk of foil? I have nothing in common with foil!
Hamlet, I see as mostly an idealist. When he denounces his mother, the Queen, and speaks ill of Claudius, the King, he often seems to compare them to what an ideal woman and wife, or King, should be in his mind. He has a perfected image of his father, and only sees him thus, and failing to see the faults and realities. He has a high sense of morality and justice, though sometimes his expectations could be viewed as unrealistic, or even slightly irrational.
Claudius, on the other hand, is more difficult. I do agree he is somewhat of a Hedonist, although after our discussion in class on the motivations behind Claudius's actions, I feel like labeling him simply as a Hedonist is too limiting. Sure, he may indulge himself with parties and drinks and he may have murdered the King as a result of his love, or lust, for Queen Gertrude and power, but Claudius is always in control of himself, and often of those around him as well. He knows his strengths and never lets his weaknesses get a hold of him, and is, in my perspective, a relatively level headed person, considering. Which leads me to believe that he is a bit of a realist as well, for his ideals are more realistic than Hamlet's, often times.
Ok I think I just might be the last one to post but I'm not entirely sure. So here is my plan, I've read the first few posts and already feel my own ideas regarding the prompt slipping away. So, I'm going to write my own thoughts here, then possibly post again addressing the discussion I presume is happening above.
So...my thoughts. I think Hamlet is kind of an existentialist. I say kind of, because Prince Hamlet fits the existentialist philosophy described on our handout quite well. He is unique in his realtionship with the Ghost and his drive for feigned madness is one that isolates him as an individual. Hamlet is also aware of the predicted consequences for his actions. However, he doesn't exactly fit what the existentialist has become today. When I think of modern existentialism I think of Emerson, and Hamlet is not Emerson-esque. Emerson completely(so he says) isolated himself, while Hamlet only emotionally isolates himself. And Prince Hamlet doesn't even completly isolate himself because he allows Horatio to come along for the crazy ride Hamlet now calls life. So, I believe Hamlet is mostly an Existentialist.
Now to place the Ghost/Ex-King. I think I might just place the Ghost as an Idealist. I'm not sure if I'm placing him here because he actually fits or if I just want to argue for an idealist and choose poor Ghost.....we'll see I suppose. I think the Ghost is an idealist for a few reasons. One reason that sticks out to me (by no means a main point) was brought up in an earlier blog. Someone mentioned that while King Hamlet was in power Prince Hamlet was off in Wittenberg. It was mused that perhaps the King was only writing what he wanted the Prince to here. I agreed with this person, asking myself 'really? Was Denmark really that great?'....so the Ghost fits point c from the worksheet. That is "one who represents things as they might or should be rather than as they are." Ok, I think my rambles just might suffice for this assignment.
Prepare yourself for my review of your guys' posts!
Ok...I have read a few more posts. Good work everyone...the coveted Especially Long Post Award goes to Christopher Wang. And there is possibly mroe to come! I'm so excited! Chris, I like how you identified multiple philosophies that Hamlet embodies. Beacsue thinking about real life people embody different philosphies at different times, and Hamlet just might be as real as things get.
And Mr. Duncan kudos on your use of personification. Your point has DEFINENTLY hit home.
I believe I’M the last post.
Horatio = Realist: He has to see it to believe it (like the ghost). He’s also a pragmatist: he’s practical. Like Kristen+Bryn+whoever else stated before: he didn’t think Hamlet should’ve followed the ghost’s requests because he believed nothing good would come out of it: which turned out to be true.
Hamlet Jr. = Idealist: He has his ideal view of everything—how a King should act, how a wife should act, etc. His father is his ideal vision of a king. Basically, everything/everyone is compared to the standards of King Hamlet. He is also a cynic: as in all his views of Claudius and Q.G. He sees Claudius as a hedonist, but I would classify Claudius more as a pragmatist. Like what Lindsey said, “Claudius values the ends, not the means.”—he’s a sneaky one... too sneaky to be merely a hedonist.
It’s getting late; I’m tired; I have other work, so I’ll be blunt about this: Gertrude is a hedonist. She does what, at the moment, will yield her the greatest benefit and pleasure. She desires high positions with safe consequences, hence marrying Claudius shortly after the late Hamlet passes. She tells lies to herself and others, but not on the scale of Claudius’s. Hers are white lies used to protect. Though she has to admit to Claudius that Hamlet killed Polonius, she tells him that Hamlet “weeps for what is done” (IV, i, 28) when really he has no regrets. Where Hamlet is introspective and philosophical, Gertrude seeks only to be ignorantly happy.
Hamlet fits a variety of philosophies, as such a deep character ought to. His condemnation of his mother for remarrying and quest for vengeance make him existentialist, in that he puts the full responsibility of their sins upon them. Though more a realist in the beginning, where he is guided by his intellect, Hamlet progresses into an existentialist when he becomes a man of action, ceasing to forestall revenge and finally accepting the consequence (dying) of killing Claudius. He learns the world is a cruel place after learning of Fortinbras’ plan to fight over “a little patch of land” (IV, iv, 98). Hamlet’s cynical nature is present throughout the play, as he questions the motives of his close friends R&G. Sarcasm is obviously another one of his traits, as his quick wit is central to his early talks with Claudius and Polonius.
Haha! It looks like Mr. Duncan just dissed Keli for her writing =(
Still, it made me laugh. Poor, Keli.
* The quote about Hamlet not loving Ophelia comes from III.i.129*
Well, I'm back from my errands. Time for a second character analysis. Maybe a third because I feel so bad about making this into chunks and because I know that the next analysis won't be so insightful and rich.
I think I will choose Claudius. I believe he is most definitely a hedonist. His whole auora / persona revolves around the word "pleasure." He wines, dines, and laughs. He has a good time (which is probably why Gertrude fell in love with Claudius), and he likes having a good time.
I will choose Polonius to be next to make up for Claudius. I describe him as a sarcastic and cynical person. He is overprotected of his daughter, trying to make his daughter realize that Hamlet is a bad guy to love. He tells her "Affection! [from Hamlet] Pooh, you speak like a green girl, / Unsifted in such perilous circumstance. / Do you believe his “tenders,” as you call them?" (I.iii.107-109) This basically is telling Ophelia that Hamlet's a guy and guys are known to offer affection but not promise it. His love is a fraud. It is also evident in his dialogue with Claudius and Gertrude when he states Hamlet's madness as if to break the reputation of Hamlet. He doesn't quite like the guy too much.
I posted before midnight! Once before 10:00pm and another before 11:00pm! Hurrah! Hurrah! This is a good turning point. Late but good.
By the way, I read all of your comments up to JD's talk about Keli's lucidicus foil. They all look fine (in my own opinionated mind). I don't see the need to argue another way.
Laertes
Laertes is primarily a realist and a pragmatist. He is very straightforward with his sister about what he thinks of Hamlet, for example. That Ophelia, knowing her brother’s character, accepts Laertes’s advice graciously gives evidence that Laertes is honest in his advice and is by no means trying to hurt his sister with hypocritical reproach. That speech reflects Laertes’s true philosophy, which is that of a realist who is aware of the political obstacles that make a lasting relationship between a prince and a courtier’s daughter unlikely. Although Laertes, unlike the idealistic Ophelia, believes that Hamlet’s love is no more than a “trifling of favor” (I, 3), he is not really a cynic. Laertes has a strong sense of duty that a cynic would not have. Laertes’s duty to the King (“… from whence though willingly I came to Denmark/ to show my duty in your coronation”) reinforces my impression that he is a realist, committed to his position in society. After Polonius’s deaths, however, Laertes displays a sense of duty to take on revenge, which makes him seem like an idealist, for whom honor is paramount. But even then, as a foil to Hamlet, Laertes is a pragmatic idealist (I took definition a. for “Idealist”… so hopefully I didn’t just make up an oxymoron…). Even though Laertes is guided by the high principle of “honor”, he does not neglect action as Hamlet does. When he returns from France, he immediately goes about heading a rebellion against the King, and, upon finding out that the King is not responsible for his father’s death, contrives a plan to kill Hamlet.
Ophelia
Okay… maybe I shouldn’t have called Ophelia an “idealist” before I get down to some qualifications… I don’t want peg her as “a visionary or impractical person” because I think that she is more mature than that. Although Ophelia believes wholeheartedly in Hamlet’s love for her, she is not a “green girl” as Polonius labels her. She accepts Laertes’s warnings with maturity, and, in her witty retort that Laertes must not “primrosse path of dalliance treads, and recks… his own rede”, she shows some realist view of the world as well. Actually, I don’t think I want to call Ophelia “idealistic” at all. I had the impression that she is idealistic because of her break down after the disillusionment, her helpless state of insanity as opposed to Laertes’s practical action… but now that I think about it… Laertes is a man, who has the resources and the support he needs to take on revenge; Ophelia, as a woman, has no such advantage. She is prevented by her circumstances to take on action. So, Ophelia’s “impracticality” cannot be blamed on her. If Hamlet suffers from his own lack of motivation, imagine Ophelia’s torture as she remembers her father’s unjust death and realizes that she has not the physical resources to ever do anything about it.
Ahh, looks like I don’t really know what Ophelia is, only what she isn’t. Only one other person has written on Ophelia (Callie!)… and I agree with her that she is a really complicated character. I’m looking forward to seeing what everyone else thinks on Friday.
Haha. Thanks, Sarah Overson :) Much appreciated.
And I love how we both have the same mindset of the "prompt slipping away" :D Great minds think alike, eh?
But actually, Sarah argued for Hamlet's existentialism in a better way that I did (which is good). He goes mad after his father's return as a ghost, leaving him to ponder about his life in isolation (or mostly, I guess, like Sarah Overson said). This LEADS to Hamlet to his "To-Be-Or-Not-To-Be" soliloquy where he has suicidal thoughts. He questions the value of life because of everything that has happen. This is why I feel Hamlet is an existentialist, among other things.
Anyway, I won't plague this blog anymore? I feel like this is uncharacteristic of me to post so many posts. Or maybe it's good if I have a few other join me in my conquest to Lit Blog domination! Mwah ha ha ha ha! Adieu, adieu, adieu. Remember me... for I will be back.
I feel that Hamlet is an idealist, who also practices existentialism. After his confrontation with the ghost, he falls into a deep mode of contemplation; He could either avenge for his dearly, rightfully deserving father and carry out the murder right away to prevent further abuse of the throne, or he must be careful not to listen to the ghost that may be satin trying to seduce him into committing a great sin. He’s independent and tries to take full responsibility for the consequences by keeping the conversation between him and his father secret from Horatio and Marcellus. In his case, Hamlet is a visionary person who is too stubborn to consider any of the good characteristics of Claudius, which could serve him in becoming a strong ruler of Denmark.
On the other hand, Gertrude can be seen as a hedonist who wants to find some happiness and pleasure in her life. After the death of the king, she realizes how dissatisfied and unhappy her life was with such an occupied warrior, that she becomes open to any source of pleasure, even if it means Claudius. She becomes more vulnerable to lust.
I disagree with Callie and Shruti about Gertrude. You two said that she was, at least some extent, an idealist. However, an idealist is someone with IDEALS. If you have some semblance of higher principles, you don’t marry your dead husband’s brother so quickly. Gertrude is heavily dependent on men—she couldn’t go more than two months without a man in her life. Perhaps, this is why Hamlet exclaims, “Frailty, thy name is woman!” Hamlet is a good example of an idealist; he wouldn’t kill Claudius mid prayer because he thought that it would be inadequate revenge. Gertrude on the other hand, does whatever makes her happy. This is a blatant form of hedonism. Also, accepting the story of how King Hamlet died doesn’t make her an idealist or else everyone in the play would be an idealist because it took a ghost to expose the murder. In fact, her blind acceptance may simply be a part of her attempt to keep her world perfectly happy. I think Callie is right, labeling her a hedonist, but idealism and hedonism don’t mix. If she married Claudius out of love, it isn’t because she idealized love, or else she would’ve broken up with King Hamlet earlier; she married Claudius for more of a lustful desire for happiness.
I will post again soon, but first I must think.
I take my Claudius with pragmatism and a hint of existentialism—yes, existentialism. Although, many have pigeon-holed Claudius as a hedonist, I do not see him as pleasure seeking because throughout the play he is rarely happy. Of course he has some fun, but to claim that his utmost goal is pleasure is a little too much. Claudius is better suited as a pragmatist because he is end-oriented. By this, I mean he is a consequentialist; he understands actions in terms of their results. Hamlet, however, is more of a deontologist; he cares more about the means than the end. This explains why Hamlet sees Claudius as a vile, deceitful king, while in reality, Claudius isn’t doing too poorly. However malevolent his actions may be, Claudius has a practical approach. He actually gets away with murder until the guy he killed comes back as a ghost and who really, can plan for that? Also, to protect Denmark, he uses his strengths, primarily his communicative ability, to minimize the possibility of war which is a pretty smart course of action when considering the alternative is fighting an angry, revengeful son named Strong Arms.
The first sign of existentialism I find within Claudius is when he feels guilt during the play that Hamlet so cleverly organized. Hamlet is prepared to kill Claudius but refrains when he finds his uncle praying. In that moment, Claudius feels the weight of the blood on his hands. Combined with the sincerity of his love for Gertrude, I must believe that Claudius has some existentialist traits. Whether or not these characteristics have nihilist implications is another matter entirely, but I think they do. Often justification for seemingly immoral actions is found by realizing that morals are merely social constructs and inherent being is without purpose. Therefore, arguably, nothing is universally wrong. Importance and purpose are only found on the individual perspective and without any sort of solid moral foundation, Claudius can kill to achieve his goals—ultimately leading back his selfish consequentialism.
I invariably set myself on too high a pedestal when I publish my blog this late with the likes of the infamous Chris Wang. However, due to the hecticly ironic nature of dead week, working, and scholarship/college commitments, this is the best time I can afford to give to my Hamlet posting. Unfortunately with such a late post, I am tempted to read what other people write perhaps more eloquently than I and say, "I agree with...," however, to avoid that I am going to try to wing it and discuss my own ideas before reading anyone elses. As I read on the paper, "Hamlet has four votes for existentialism," and I agree with this statement. First, I recall Hamlet's soliloquy we watched last class. Hamlet seems to ponder and delve deep in thought. He spends a lot of time, especially later in the play, expressing cynicism towards society and the world he has been forced to grow accustomed to. First, he is cynical of the man who is now his father, the man who is "a little more than kin and less thank kind," oh the wit of Hamlet... Also, he is cynical of his mother, often disgusted with the lust he feel she portrays in marrying Claudius so soon after his fathers death. One thing I noticed about Hamlet, is that I find it ironic that he is an existentialist and a realist in the beginning of the novel whereas he has the ability to make rash decisions on impulse, like stabbing Polonius through the curtain without seeing who it was first. I think that Hamlet's contradictions and his wit draw me to him the most, he has a lot of depth as a character, just when you think you know how he operates he throws a curve ball. Anyhoo, I'm really getting tired now. Onward...
I have no doubt that someone before me has discussed how acutely Claudius seems to be a hedonist. My first account of this lies in
Act 1 Scene 2 when Claudius says... "Why, 'tis a loving and a fair reply...in grace whereof no jocund health that denmark drinks today..." The minute that Hamlet agrees to stay Claudius exclaims that a celebration is in order, a celebration loud enough to reach the heavens. Although Claudius is a hedonist and he likes to "make merry," we discussed last class how he is not a drunkard. Nonetheless, he enjoys a good time and likes the role of king in his ability to socialize and drink to his country. Further, I think that Gertrude is a pleasure to Claudius and much of the reason that he slayed the late Hamlet. As much as he may have slayed to have the power of kingship, his life holds power and happiness to the highest degree.
I found Claudius to be a bit of a hedonism. He loves power, parties, drinking and all the good perks of power. He holds these pleasures even a above human life as he goes and kills his own brother, King Hamlet, to obtain the happiness and pleasures of being a king. But although he attained his dream of power and riches, you can still see the guilt of the murder in him and he is generally not very happy.
But as a king, he isn't doing too bad actually. He got away with the murder of the king AND married the queen. He plans it out and so he is also pragmatic.
Hamlet strikes me as an idealist. The mysterious death of his father obviously conflicted him dearly but still couldn't bring himself to take action and murder the new king, his uncle, for revenge.
by encountering his father's ghost, Hamlet falls in a deep place of thought. Is he crazy? Or is there really a soul that it is talking to him? I see also a bit of existentialism in him. He damns his uncle and mother for their actions (one killing the king, the other marrying the murderer so quickly)
I'm thinking Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are cynics because first of all they are rather shallow friends, able to be bought by the king and queen. Then they assume that simple pleasures such as the players would make right whatever was bothering their friend. They fail to realize that other people have deeper problems then sensual disatisfaction.
For my two foils I selected Horatio and Polonius. Horatio I believe is a Pragmatist. He tries to be the best friend he possibly can to Hamlet, tries to keep him grounded and sane. Horatio has a very logical way of approaching situations and is a key example of Pragmatism. Polonius on the other hand I find to be a cynic. He's very wound up in himself; in his own wit, his own standing with the King and Queen (more the former than the latter). He is not concerned at all with the feelings of his daughter for Hamlet and when Polonius sees the slightest weakness in him (not knowing it's a facade), he pounces on the chance to be in the King's good graces and uses his daughter as bait.
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.
You can also follow any responses to all entry through the RSS Comments feed.