Intro Hamlet

Speech patterns on the page seem artificial: they are simply put into place by an author to organize thoughts and ideas, right? Although many argue that dictation is meaningless in dissecting a work of literature and one must look much deeper into abstract thoughts, Shakespeare’s Hamlet proves that diction not only provides a meaning to the words themselves, but also creates a personal connection between the reader and character: a type of bond over emotion through words. This is seen when comparing two very typical characters seen through everyone’s eyes: an indecisive follower and an overbearing manipulator. Hamlet is a boy who has gone through a terrible lost, leaving him in a vulnerable state of mind, easily persuaded by the authoritative Claudius who is very willing to tell Hamlet how to think and act. While at first it may appear that Hamlet and Claudius speak with the same conviction and purpose, closer examination reveals Hamlet’s deep uncertainty and therefore Claudius’ clever use of manipulation. 

Clauddy & Hammy

Hamlet and Claudius have a very different demeanor and point of view as evidenced by their language in Act 1: Scene 2. Hamlet is in obvious mourning of his fathers death and therefore has a more somber tone than Claudius, who seems to be completely over his brothers death (we learn later on it is because he is the one who has murdered him). Hamlet uses very negative language by repeating “nor” when describing his emotions, illustrating his sadness over the death of his father; however, Claudius seems angry as the reader can see when he asks a rhetorical question to Hamlet and then answers it himself with exclamation. He is hurt by the amount of grief shown by Hamlet and tries to comfort him but instead shows his true feelings of the whole situation: anger and discomfort. 

King Claudius' Speech Analysis pg. 728-730

In King Claudius’ speech, he reprimands Hamlet for mourning the death of his father. Although he calls Hamlet “sweet and commendable,” he believes that it is not manly to mourn the death of one’s father. Claudius backs his theory by pointing out that Hamlet’s “father lost a father, that father lost, lost his” in essence saying that everyone dies and he should not mourn what he cannot change and in doing so would be an insult to nature. Instead he should start to think of Claudius as his new father; however, Claudius’ tone suggests an underlying objective. 

Poem Analysis

The poems “Out, Out,-“ and To An Athlete Die Young are very similar in overall storyline; however, these two poems differ in tone as well as plot. In “Out, Out-“ Robert Frost tells a story from start to finish instead of Housman who analyzes a situation that has already happened. If I were to write a compare and contrast essay, I would first write about Frost’s poem and then about Housman’s in two separate paragraphs. The reason I would do this is mostly due to length. If I had two novels to compare and contrast I would use the tactic of formulating ideas about BOTH books and then formulating my essay depending on those different ideas; however, since these are poems and simply do not have enough to analyze without getting repetitive, I would use the first option. 

Plot

Essentially a story’s plot is what happens during a conflict. It is told from a point of view, in a setting, about a series of events. One story that perfectly exemplifies the conventional narrative is the first Harry Potter book. The exposition is from the start of the play until the owls start delivering Harry’s acceptance into Hogwarts. The rising action starts when he is visited by Hagrid (the inciting incident) and is introduced to the magical world. The climax is when Harry fights with Voldemort over the sorcerer’s stone because the suspense of the book reaches it’s peak. The falling action is very short but is all of the events that occur at Hogwarts after Harry defeats Voldemort and obtains the sorcerer’s stone. The denouement occurs on the train ride home when all is resolved. 

Woodchucks vs. Traveling through the Dark

The only real similarity between these two poems, in my opinion, is that an animal dies; however, these poems are VERY different. The first poem, “Woodchucks” by Maxine Kumin, describes a woman’s intense yet comical pursuit to kill the woodchucks that are eating her garden. Unlike William Stafford’s poem, “Traveling through the Dark,” the narrator in “Woodchucks” has some sort of vendetta against the woodchucks and wants to kill them and even tries multiple ways to do so. The narrator in “Traveling through the Dark” describes “hesitation” very different to the confidence that the reader detects in “Woodchucks.” The dictation in the two poems is very different as well. In “Woodchucks,” Kumin uses allusions (such as Darwin and Nazis) to dramatize a simple task in order to create comedy. Whereas Stafford uses a somber tone and realistic tension when he discovers an unborn baby in the deer’s stomach. Although both of these poems are somewhat similar in subject matter, they are very different in motivation, dictation, and overall tone. 

D.W. Harding

Disagree- I disagree with Harding's fundamental opinion. He believes that Austen's satire doesn't work because it is simple and lack-luster and even describes it as "a mock assault and not genuinely disruptive." However, he then goes on to say that Austen makes a mockery of "people whom she herself detests and fears." Harding is at two different ends of the spectrum. On one side Austen does not negatively lean into her satirical characters enough, and on the other side, Austen is way to harsh on the characters due to her own harsh feelings towards what they represent in her own life.

Agree- I agree that Austen is bias due to her place in society; however, I do not believe that it negatively affects her writing. It is her bias that makes her satire and writing intriguing and funny. In fact, pieces based simply on fact are boring, in my opinion. I even appreciate Harding's article because he takes a stance and supports it, but why can't he do the same for Austen?