Compare and contrast Brideshead Revisited with The Man Who was Thursday. How are they different and how are they similar with respect to the following aspects: the authors' styles, the content of the story, the idea of modernity, and the idea of the Church or Catholicism. For The Man Who Was Thursday, recall that Gabriel Syme is a Catholic fighting, "the Last Crusade."
Do your best. Remember, a blog is a conversation and we often get our best ideas by talking or communicating with one another. Good Luck!
Mrs. Messineo
Friday, March 28, 2014
Saturday, March 15, 2014
Major Themes and Symbols in Hamlet
Intro to literary criticism
Provided is a link to an introduction to literary criticisms. I would like each student to choose and explain a literary criticism and apply it to Hamlet. For example, if one were to interpret Shakespeare's Hamlet from a Marxist perspective, it might look something like this:
Application in Shakespeare’s Hamlet
While Hamlet might not seem to be a likely text for a strong Marxist reading given that its protagonist is a man of privilege and that the play takes place in a fictional version of 16th century Denmark, Hamlet can be interpreted through a number of different Marxist theoretical approaches. A Marxist critic might take a particular interest in the manner in which Hamlet subverts Claudius’s rule by engaging in acts of subterfuge, manipulation, and revolution in order to overcome his oppressive rule over him. A critic may also argue that Hamlet’s actions serve to demonstrate a way by which an oppressive ideological regime can be countered and overcome. A Marxist theorist might argue that Claudius killed his brother King Hamlet in order to gain political, social, and economic power, and hence might be viewed as a figure who is corrupted by his desire for social and political power. Hamlet himself steps outside of the standards, rules, and norms established and encouraged by the ruling class that he was once a part of in order to resist its oppressive ideology. Such a critical viewpoint might serve to argue that Hamlet is at least partly about Hamlet’s own sudden separation from and realization of the ideological faults of the political structure he is or was a part of. Also, a Marxist theorist might take interest in the plays focus on characters who belong to the ruling class and the lack of "voice" given to common people in the play. One may argue that Shakespeare—who, himself, was born to a commoner and was himself very much a member of what we would today call the "working class" or "middle class"—is issuing an attack or critique of the oppressive and morally corrupt ideology of the ruling classes throughout Hamlet. Furthermore, a Marxist critique of Hamlet might take special interest in the famous grave digging scene of the play, and point out how Shakespeare positions the gravedigger—who is the only common or non-privileged character given a prominent voice within the narrative—as a source of wisdom capable of recognizing intrinsic truths about existence and the nature of the events that have come to pass within the story that the high-ranking and privileged characters in the play, including Hamlet himself, are unable to realize partly because of their own class positions. While a Marxist theorist would probably not argue that Shakespeare was himself quite a proto- Marxist, he or she might argue that in Hamlet, Shakespeare was anticipating and recognizing ideas concerning class distinctions and attitudes that were further developed by Karl Marx over 300 years later. By the way, Karl Marx was crazy and as Catholics, we do not agree with his actions or thoughts. He started the communist revolution. He also thinks that the only thing that really matters is "stuff".
Provided is a link to an introduction to literary criticisms. I would like each student to choose and explain a literary criticism and apply it to Hamlet. For example, if one were to interpret Shakespeare's Hamlet from a Marxist perspective, it might look something like this:
Application in Shakespeare’s Hamlet
While Hamlet might not seem to be a likely text for a strong Marxist reading given that its protagonist is a man of privilege and that the play takes place in a fictional version of 16th century Denmark, Hamlet can be interpreted through a number of different Marxist theoretical approaches. A Marxist critic might take a particular interest in the manner in which Hamlet subverts Claudius’s rule by engaging in acts of subterfuge, manipulation, and revolution in order to overcome his oppressive rule over him. A critic may also argue that Hamlet’s actions serve to demonstrate a way by which an oppressive ideological regime can be countered and overcome. A Marxist theorist might argue that Claudius killed his brother King Hamlet in order to gain political, social, and economic power, and hence might be viewed as a figure who is corrupted by his desire for social and political power. Hamlet himself steps outside of the standards, rules, and norms established and encouraged by the ruling class that he was once a part of in order to resist its oppressive ideology. Such a critical viewpoint might serve to argue that Hamlet is at least partly about Hamlet’s own sudden separation from and realization of the ideological faults of the political structure he is or was a part of. Also, a Marxist theorist might take interest in the plays focus on characters who belong to the ruling class and the lack of "voice" given to common people in the play. One may argue that Shakespeare—who, himself, was born to a commoner and was himself very much a member of what we would today call the "working class" or "middle class"—is issuing an attack or critique of the oppressive and morally corrupt ideology of the ruling classes throughout Hamlet. Furthermore, a Marxist critique of Hamlet might take special interest in the famous grave digging scene of the play, and point out how Shakespeare positions the gravedigger—who is the only common or non-privileged character given a prominent voice within the narrative—as a source of wisdom capable of recognizing intrinsic truths about existence and the nature of the events that have come to pass within the story that the high-ranking and privileged characters in the play, including Hamlet himself, are unable to realize partly because of their own class positions. While a Marxist theorist would probably not argue that Shakespeare was himself quite a proto- Marxist, he or she might argue that in Hamlet, Shakespeare was anticipating and recognizing ideas concerning class distinctions and attitudes that were further developed by Karl Marx over 300 years later. By the way, Karl Marx was crazy and as Catholics, we do not agree with his actions or thoughts. He started the communist revolution. He also thinks that the only thing that really matters is "stuff".
Friday, March 7, 2014
Life?
Suicide is an important theme in Hamlet. Discuss how the play treats the idea of suicide morally, religiously, and aesthetically, with particular attention to Hamlet’s two important statements about suicide: the “O, that this too too solid flesh would melt” soliloquy (I.ii.129–158) and the “To be, or not to be” soliloquy (III.i.56–88). Why does Hamlet believe that, although capable of suicide, most human beings choose to live, despite the cruelty, pain, and injustice of the world?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)