Hamlet = Fishmonger 4 Life

Pullin a Heinrich

2008-03-09T21:59:00.000-07:00

Just a few moments ago, around 10 pm, I told my dad I was going to head down to the gym because I was pretty much done with my homework. He then proceeded to head into my room, turn on the light, and tell me I hadn't made any progress cleaning it up. I then replied with a "I know, I know; I'll get around to it", and that's when it all started. First we started debating on whether or not I had actually made any progress at all, then he said, "I think that's what you always say. You always say you'll get around to it." I replied by saying that I eventually do "get around to it", just not as quickly as you'd like. He said that I don't get around to it, seeing as how it has only happened two or three times in the last two years. I told him that even though it may have only happened two or three times, the fact that it gets clean proves my point that I do "get around to it", whether or not it's timely though is up for debate. We then went back and forth with the same arguments for a while, and he finally told me, "You aren't bolstering your case very well." I could tell the big bad wolf was getting angry, so I told him what the assignment was and I read him the dialogue between Heinrich and the father. Before I even got half of the page read he cut in, saying I sounded just like Heinrich, always trying to piss him off with some stupid comments. Haha. I kept reading and he then grabbed the book and said "What is this crap (not really the word he chose)? This just sounds like a bunch of mental masturbation!" I then told him, "Hey, it's postmodern. That's what it's supposed to be," and with that I ended the conversation and came here to blog.

Distance

2008-02-15T08:04:00.000-08:00

I'm not sure if I understand how to respond to the prompt in order to give my opinion. I believe that a writer can and should write something that may not reflect their Christian views. Similarly, I believe that actors should not stick solely to Christian roles that reflect all of their views. Now before anyone condemns me, let me explain; I'll use Denzel as my example. In the movie He Got Game, directed by Spike Lee, Denzel plays an incarcerated father who gets released for a short time in order to convince his basketball phenom of a son to play at a certain college. Throughout the movie, Denzel does things that may not be considered Christian, however I don't consider that necessarily bad. If Denzel were to refuse to do anything that goes against Christianity, it would ruin the movie. Many of the gripes people have about movies is the fact that they don't seem real. Just think if Denzel were to say "Get that hate out your heart son, or you'll end up just another black man, like your father". The movie would seem so fake that I doubt anyone would bother to watch. Many of the arguments I have read on others blogs bring up the issue of actors just wanting money, but I don't believe you can paint actors with such a broad brush. I personally don't believe that Denzel takes roles based on money. Denzel just released a book called "A Hand to Guide Me", in which he donated all the proceeds of the book to the Boys and Girls Club. I honestly have so much I want to say, but my thoughts are so jumbled that I'm not even sure if what I just said makes sense.

Darkness

2008-02-13T08:17:00.000-08:00

Throughout "Adolescence-II", the girl never seems to directly interact with the darkness. Darkness in usually symbolic of evil, while light is usually symbolic of good. Therefore, due to the fact that the girl never directly interacts with the darkness, it would appear that she is trying not to succumb to it. It almost seems as if the darkness is seeking her out; for instance, the three seal men come bringing the scent of licorice. Therefore, I would say that evil is seeking the girl out, possibly in the demonic sense. In a way it reminds me of The Exorcism of Emily Rose, because the innocent girl seems to be targeted down by the darkness, however she never directly seeks it out.

Postmodernism in Adolescence-II

2008-02-12T08:26:00.000-08:00

There are numerous examples of postmodernism within Rita Dove's "Adolescence-II". For example, in lines 8-10, the three seal men ask "Can you feel it yet?", and then "They chuckle, Patting their sleek bodies with their hands." The way the men chuckle provides an example of the celebration of disorder. It seems to me that the poem is talking about this girl getting raped, and the men are laughing about it. Another example of postmodernism is "the three seal men with eyes as round As dinner plates and eyelashes like sharpened tines". Even though I believe that the three seal men are actual men, it is possible that they are signifiers that don't point to signifieds. It could be that the three seal men are not really men at all, however that isn't what I believe.

Rita Dove's "Adolescence-II"

Breakdown of Words & Meaning

2008-02-08T11:50:00.000-08:00

I believe that the breakdown of words and meaning lies in both the inadequate system of language as well as the inadequate understanding of reality. In one sense, I can see how language could fail when attempting to express meaning, because "all true language is incomprehensible" (Antonin Artaud). All true language is incomprehensible because everything can be boiled down to "things". Even in the piece "Toast" by Margret Atwood, toast is deconstructed into its true existence...a thing. On the other hand, I could see how an inadequate understanding of reality could contribute to the breakdown of meaning, because "There is an objective reality out there, but we view it through the spectacles of our beliefs, attitudes, and values " (David G. Myers). Therefore, everything can be broken down into a "thing" depending on our spectacles, if you catch my drift. So, a postmodernist will see everything as merely a "thing" and having no other meaning than that, while theists may see everything as more than that.

http://www.enotes.com/famous-quotes/all-true-languageis-incomprehensible-like-the

http://www.quotegarden.com/reality.html

Hyper-reality Victim

2008-01-29T23:21:00.000-08:00

Over the years I have fallen into the trap of hyper-reality in many different ways, as many other Americans also have. The first area in which I have fallen into the hyper-reality trap is with my bodybuilding DVD's. When I watch the DVD's, I get so into them that I find myself mimicking everything they do. If Ronnie Coleman is leg-pressing 2300 lbs. and is yelling to pump himself up, I find myself wanting to yell as well. A second area, but also somewhat simillar, is in regards to the advertising of supplements. For example, this summer I purchased some pretty expensive anabolic steroids...just kidding! Seriously though, I purchased some pretty expensive protein powder that was $35 for a 3 lb. tub because supposedly it could lead to 10 lbs. of muscle gain. The advertising appealed to the lifestyle I want to live and it played on what it is I want to do, which is gain 10 lbs. of muscle.

Hyperreality-reality and Love

2008-01-27T14:09:00.000-08:00

Hyper-reality has tremendously affected the American perception of love and relationships in today's culture. One reason it has affected the American perception of love and relationships is because it causes people to take "someone else's version of reality on board as his or her own". For example, if someone takes on the reality of the tv show Two and a Half Men, they will be taking on a reality filled with one-night stands and promiscuity. This is evident in the fact that more people these days consider one-night stands perfectly acceptable and use sex as a basis of how successful their relationship is. Another reason it has affected the American perception of love and relationships is because the media attempts to project an image they hope others will buy into. A great example of this is the Axe commercials, where the men put on their Axe deodorant and all the women proceed to attack them. The commercial is touting lust as opposed to real love.

Christianity and Postmodernism

2008-01-21T18:15:00.000-08:00

Christians and Postmodernists are on opposite ends of the spectrum in regards to order and disorder. Christians usually seem to celebrate the order, while Postmodernists on the other hand celebrate the disorder. However, I'm not sure that us Christians should completely shun anything that comes across as disorder. I think that there are certain instances where we as Christians should embrace the disorder instead of solely focusing on the order. For instance, someone may consider poverty the "disorder" and financial stability the "order". Depending on how you view your situation though, poverty may not be all bad. It's bad from the sense that you struggle to put food on the table and keep a roof over your family's head, however, for those who are optimistic and positive, it's good because it teaches you perserverance and helps to make you stronger in the end. Therefore, as Christians, I believe that we shouldn't focus on the order so much that we forget to take a look at what good can come from the disorder. If there are certain beliefs within Postmodernism that also apply to Christianity, then I feel we shouldn't hesitate to embrace them.

Sparrow the Postmodernist

2008-01-16T23:13:00.000-08:00

Well, I have never seen any of the Pirates of the Carribean movies before, so my response probably will not be as in depth as some other people. Right before we left class we took a few notes on postmodernism, and one of the main points was that postmodernism celebrates the disorder. From all the previews and short little clips I have seen played, I would say that Jack Sparrow is postmodernism because he celebrates the disorder. In all the previews there seems to be some type of chaos or uproar going on, whether he is being chased or whether he is fighting at sea with monster type things. All of this chaos and uproar is how Jack Sparrow celebrates the disorder. That is the best guess I have based on what I have seen and know.

Why End on a Boat?

2008-01-13T23:19:00.000-08:00

I'm not too sure why the movie would end on a boat. When someone is out in the middle of the ocean in a boat, there is nobody around, just you and the ocean. You look off in the distance and all you see is water with no visible land. For the life of me though, I can't figure out why the movie would end on a boat. I guess since Rosencrantz and Guildenstern were of little importance and were nobodies, it would make sense for them to die on a boat in the ocean, because when you're on a boat in the ocean, you're basically a nobody. You're just a small boat in a vast expanse of water, subject to the ocean and mother nature. Does that make any sense whatsoever? Basically, since R & G are nobodies, it makes sense for them to die on a boat where they're nobodies.

Poster

2008-01-11T23:30:00.000-08:00

The thing that first caught my attention with the poster was the transformer in the center. It seemed to me that the meaning of the poster had something to do with that. I felt that the poster meant that society has transformed over time. When I say that, I mean that society has transformed, or rather changed its values and what if feels is important.

Ant

2008-01-11T23:11:00.000-08:00

I was able to overcome my ant shell at the gym on Thursday. I was at the gym doing a super intense shoulder workout, and I figured since I was going to up the weight, I better ask someone for a spot, which I usually don't bother to do. When I'm at the gym I keep to myself for the most part and try to keep my mind on getting done what I'm in there to do; it's not a social event. Not only did I ask a dude for a spot, but I also offered to help him out with a spot whenever he needed it. The guy seemed surprised when I told him to just ask me whenever he needed a spot. It was actually sorta funny. In the end, he spotted for me and I spotted for him. It was superb to say the least.

Approval or Disapproval?

2008-01-02T22:58:00.000-08:00

In Act 5 Scene 2, and line 56, Horatio responds to Hamlet by saying, "So Guildenstern and Rosencrantz go to 't." After reading in context of the conversation, I believe that Horatio is saying this neither in approval nor disapproval. When I read up to this line, I just get the sense that Horatio is making small talk with what he says in line 56. It seems like water-cooler talk. Hamlet explains to Horatio that the two of them had it coming, and Horatio's expression and demeanor seems to remain nonchalant and he seems as if he really doesn't care about what happened with them. I know I didn't provide any textual support for my opinion, but after reading it numerous times that's how Horatio came across to me.

Structure and Argument

2007-12-10T23:21:00.000-08:00

It seems to me that this poem is addressing age and how we change as we grow older. In lines 120 and 121, the speaker says, "I grow old...I grow old, I shall wear the bottoms of my trousers rolled." In other words, people's whole entire demeanor and actions can change, just like the seasons. I think that this poem is constructed in a way so that it makes a statement about life. It seems that he could almost be saying that life is somewhat structured due to the layout. The reason I say this is because he seems to break up the stanzas into different experiences within his life, unlike the first poem we read which was completely unstructured. In other words, he may be saying that there is some order to life.

What We Are and May Be

2007-12-05T19:26:00.000-08:00

So, what does Ophelia mean when she says, "Lord, we know what we are, but know not what we may be," in lines 43 and 45 of Act 4, Scene 5? I interpret this line two different ways. When I first read the line, I interpreted it as saying that we may know what we are right now, in the present, but can never be sure what we will be in the future. This reminds me of the movie Reign Over Me, with Adam Sandler and Don Cheadle. In the movie, Adam Sandler loses his wife and three kids in the 9/11 terrorist attacks, and his life is turned upside down. Before he lost his family, he was a dentist as well as a happy father and husband, but after the traumatic event he becomes a hermit who pretends as if he never had a family. He knew what he was before 9/11, but had no idea what the future had in store for him. The second way I interpreted it was that, people may think they know what or who they are, but in reality they have no idea what they have become. I can think of many examples to illustrate my point. The first example that comes to mind is the movie Death Sentence, with Kevin Bacon, where his son is murdered by gang members while at a gas station. He then decides to get his own revenge after his son's killer is set free from jail. Kevin Bacon thought he was a grieving father, but in reality had turned into a killing machine.

Movie or Book?

2007-12-03T22:00:00.000-08:00

I have reasons for and against both the movie and the book. I enjoy reading from the book because it leaves you free to imagine. Much of the time in class when we're reading, I think of how Denzel would act the part, and then I go from there. It gives you the freedom to make buildings and scenes look a certain way. I dislike reading from the book though because it can be rather complicated to understand. You can read over the line, but the way that you inflect can change how you interpret a sentence or whole entire conversation. I enjoy the movie because it helps to visualize what is going on. Hearing the characters actually speak helps to better understand what's being said and what's going on. When we read from the book, we may miss certains puns or jokes that are going on, but the movie helps to tie it all together. The only problem I have with the movie is that some of the acting is pretty crappy. Even though the director left certain parts of the movie out, I still enjoy it. The director seemed to assign different emotions to certain characters at different points in the movie that don't necessarily fit with the book, but I still think it's pretty good. I guess if I absolutely had to choose between the movie or the book, I'd have to go with the movie.

Purpose of Plays/Art = to Point Out Society's Flawed Nature?

2007-11-29T22:50:00.000-08:00

I both agree and disagree with Hamlet's opinion of the purpose of plays and/or art. I know that in many cases, plays and art do a stupendous job of pointing out society's flawed nature, but at other times, it seems as if it does anything but. Take for example the play "The Nut Cracker"; while one could come up with some ideas as to how the play points out flaws in society, I do not think that the main purpose of the play is to point that out. The play is about a young girl who falls asleep with her new nut cracker, given to her by her grandfather, and finds herself in a fantasy world with her now real life nut cracker. Nowhere in the whole play is the sole purpose to point out flaws withing society. On the flip side of the coin, we have such things as musical art. Take for example Tupac Shakur; many of his songs and poetry dealt with problems in society. In the song "Dear Mama", Tupac says,

"Now ain't nobody tell us it was fair

No love for my daddy 'cause the coward wasn't there

He passed away and I didn't cry, cause my anger

Wouldn't let me feel for a stranger

They say I'm wrong and I'm heartless, but all along

I was lookin for a father he was gone

I hung around with the thugs, and even though they sold drugs

They showed a young brother love

I moved out and started really hangin

I needed money of my own so I started slangin"

Pac does a great job of explaining a flaw of today's society, that flaw being single-parent homes where mothers are left to raise the children all on their own. So once again, I both agree and disagree with Hamlet.

How Much of a Threat Does Claudius Consider Hamlet?

2007-11-28T20:02:00.000-08:00

I think Claudius considers Hamlet a formidable threat, because it seems that he is a little too overly concerned about Hamlet and why he has gone crazy. It is perfectly natural for a parent to be concerned and try to figure out what is causing this change, however I think Claudius goes a little overboard. It seems that no matter what is going on around him, he wants to know about Hamlet. A great example of this is in Act 2, Scene 2, when Voltimand brings news that Fortinbras does not want to fight him anymore, but rather wants safe passage through so they can go fight the Polish. Instead of tending to this important business, Claudius tells Voltimand, "at our more considered time we'll read, answer, and think upon this business"(81-82). If Claudius does not consider Hamlet much of a threat, I do not see why he would have blown off national matters in order to tend to personal matters. Hamlet is a big enough threat to Claudius to cause him to abandon his responsibilities and duties as King. I do not believe that Claudius knows Hamlet saw his father's ghost, however it seems he believes Hamlet knows a little more than he would like.

2007-11-27T22:24:00.000-08:00

I do believe that Hamlet was truly in love with Ophelia. My reasoning behind this lies in Act 2, Scene 2, Lines 118-122, when Polonius reads Hamlet's letters that he has written to Ophelia aloud. In the letter, Hamlet declares, "But never doubt I love(119)" and just two lines ahead, he tells her, "But that I love thee best, O most best, believe it." Now, it is quite possible that this is Hamlet's crazy side and he really doesn't mean what he says, because we all know that he has been acting a little "Coo-Coo for Cocoa Puffs" since discovering how his father truly died. However, I do believe that Hamlet wrote the letter with a clear mind and meant everything that he said to her. So, if we were to make an educated decision as to whether or not we think Hamlet truly loved Ophelia, then based on Hamlet's own words, I would have to assume he still loved Ophelia.