Denmark High

In my version of Hamlet, Hamlet, son of ex-principal Hamlet I, is having trouble dealing with his father's recent death, and has been rather depressed lately.  To make matters worse, his horrible uncle is taking over as the new principal and his new father.  Not even his girlfriend Ophelia or best friends Horatio and Marcellus seem to understand.  Poor Hamlet has absolutely no one to talk to-- not even the guidance counselor, Polonius, would be able to offer any advice even remotely helpful to Hamlet's situation.

Act 1 Scene 2 would open on Principal Claudius droning on and on over the intercom about how tragic Principal Hamlet's sudden death is, but that the school must continue to move forward.  However, because of the sad state the school is in, he's calling off the big game against Denmark High's rival school, Norway High.

Afterward, he's allows the guidance counselor's son, Laertes, to participate in a foreign-exchange program in France.  Not that he'd ever let Hamlet do anything like that-- with Claudius as his stepfather, Hamlet has little to no freedom.

In the middle of class, Hamlet is called to Principal Claudius' office, in which he finds Principal Claudius and his mother, who lecture him on why he needs to get over his father's death for the good of his studies.

After school, Hamlet is approached by his best friends, Horatio and Marcellus, who deliver some interesting news about Hamlet's father. . .

H a m l e t - "To Be Or Not To Be"

"To be or not to be"-- the most famous line from the most famous soliloquy of Shakespeare's Hamlet.  The following videos are two different portrayals of the legendary speech-- one by David Tennant, and the other by William Belchambers.

     David Tennant:

In this scene, David Tennant does an excellent job conveying Hamlet's temptation to commit suicide.  He then seems deterred after realizing that to sleep is to dream, and that he's too afraid to sacrifice the suffering he endures now only to find that the dreams in death are far worse.  He then lets this fear drive his anger, as he realizes it's this fear of the unknown that makes us all cowards.

     William Belchambers:

One of the main differences between this scene and the prior is that in the first, David Tennant was talking to himself, and in this one, William Belchambers is recording himself.  In my opinion, this subtle difference completely changes the purpose behind the speech.  Most versions feature Hamlet coming to these revelations by himself and for himself.  However in William Belchamber's version, the fact that he's recording himself makes it feel more like a suicide note, and therefore makes the possibility of him killing himself seem much more likely than in the first.

I am very impressed by both versions.  In my opinion, David Tennant's version is more accurate, because he sticks to the proper time period and better tries to embody Shakespeare's intentions for the scene.  However, William Belchambers' version is my favorite because the bold choices the director makes the scene even more powerful.

O m e l a s - Paragraph Revision

    - O r i g i n a l -
The way the child is treated represents a kind of selfishness that one could say is partially driven by the will to conform.  Le Guin implies that the citizens would be a lot less likely to accept the situation if they were not surrounded by an entire community of people who encourage it.  This is expressed in the quotation "To exchange all the goodness and grace of every life in Omelas for that single, small improvement: to throw away the happiness of thousands for the chance of the happiness of one: that would be to let guilt within the walls indeed" (601).  Seeing as guilt is highly discouraged in Omelas, the citizens are being taught that it would be immoral to help the child.

    - R e v i s e d -
The way the child is treated represents a kind of selfishness that one could say is partially driven by the will to conform.  Le Guin writes "To exchange all the goodness and grace of every life in Omelas for that single, small improvement: to throw away the happiness of thousands for the chance of the happiness of one: that would be to let guilt within the walls indeed" (601).  This implies that the citizens would be a lot less likely to accept the situation if they were not surrounded by an entire community of people who encourage it.  Le Guin also writes "One thing I know there is none of in Omelas is guilt" (599)-- nor is there disgust or anger, because all negative emotions are discouraged.  Because of this, the citizens are being taught that to help the child would be a display of guilt, and would therefore be considered obstructionism.

O p h e l i a

Ophelia's character is one of much controversy-- no one is quite sure exactly how Shakespeare intended to portray her.  Some say she's innocent, compliant, and naive, while others argue she's clever and sometimes even defiant.

In the following portrayal of Act 1, Scene 3, Ophelia strikes me as cooperative and submissive.  She loves Hamlet, but she doesn't argue with what her brother tells her.  In fact, the news seems to distress her, as if she completely believes what she's being told.

However, in this next clip, Ophelia is depicted as being more capable of thinking for herself.  She still listens to what her brother tells her, but is also ready to turn the tables and prove that she's not oblivious to the fact that Laertes is being totally hypocritical.

So who is Ophelia?  Innocent, or obstinate?  Compliant, or defiant?  How do you think Shakespeare meant to portray her?

H a m l e t: 1st Impression

While reading Act 1 Scene 2 of Shakespeare's Hamlet for the first time, I couldn't help but feel bad for Hamlet for a few reasons...

1. His dad just passed away less than two months ago.
2. If that wasn't bad enough, his mother remarried IMMEDIATELY, and shows almost no signs of remorse or grievance.
3. His new dad is his uncle, King Claudius, and it's pretty clear the two of them don't exactly see eye to eye.

So yeah, I guess you could say that things aren't going too great for Hamlet at the moment.  It seems like he had a really strong bond with his father, and that he’s not getting the kind of closure he needs after his father’s passing.  No one seems to understand what he’s going through, or to even care that the King has died.  Poor Hamlet begins to wish that "the Everlasting had not fixed/ His canon 'gainst self-slaughter" (1.2.135), meaning that he's contemplating suicide.

What Hamlet really needs is time to grieve, someone to talk to, and a new role model.  Thank God he has the sympathetic and understanding King Claudius and Queen Gertrude by his side to give him just that!

...Oh, wait-- my bad.  That's not even close.

King Claudius tells Hamlet that "to perserver/ In obstinate condolement is a course/ Of impious stubbornness" (1.2.96).  Well I guess that eliminates time to grieve.  Later in the scene, Hamlet discusses his feelings towards his mother's remarriage, and says "But break, my heart, for I must hold my tongue" (1.2.164).  Looks like that eliminates someone to talk to...  But at least he has the noble King Claudius to look to for hope as a reverent successor to his father, right?  ...Whoops-- wrong again.  In Hamlet’s eyes, his father is to Claudius as Hyperion is to a satyr, which is a major burn on Claudius’ behalf.

So yeah, it looks like things aren’t really going too great for Hamlet at this point in the story.  But who knows?  Maybe things will shape up for our protagonist-- it’s not like this is a tragedy or anything.

Oh, wait...

Symbolism in Omelas

In the short story "The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas", Ursula Le Guin uses the symbol of a child to symbolize injustice and the way the child is treated to represent selfishness.  She also addresses the unnerving reality that we often accept unjust affairs merely because everyone else does.  The only people who refuse to accept the treatment of the child are the ones who walk away from Omelas-- the characters which represent the people in the world who question authority when they think something isn't right.  The ones who walk away represent those of us who are unwilling to turn a blind eye, and would rather give up all our wealth than be part of a corrupt community.

The child in the closet symbolizes injustice and inhumanity.  All of the citizens of Omelas seem to have accepted the idea that their prosperity depends solely on the misery of that single child.  The child is kept alone in a dark, disgusting closet, and the citizens of Omelas are forbidden from helping it or showing it any kindness because “if it were cleaned and fed and comforted. . .in that day and hour all the prosperity and beauty and delight of Omelas would wither and be destroyed” (Le Guin 601).  In this quotation, Le Guin portrays that the citizens of Omelas firmly believe that their wealth is worth the suffering of an innocent child.

The way the child is treated represents a kind of selfishness that one could say is partially driven by the will to conform.  Le Guin implies that the citizens would be a lot less likely to accept the situation if they were not surrounded by an entire community of people who encourage it.  This is expressed in the quotation “To exchange all the goodness and grace of every life in Omelas for that single, small improvement: to throw away the happiness of thousands for the chance of the happiness of one: that would be to let guilt within the walls indeed” (601).  Seeing as guilt is highly discouraged in Omelas, the citizens are being taught that it would be immoral to help the child.

However, not everyone in Omelas is willing to accept this mindset.  The ones who walk away from Omelas are the ones who refuse to take part in an unjust community, and represent those of us who question authority and are not willing to comply with a community's norms if we find them immoral.  Most people are upset about the child at first, but learn to accept it.  However, “at times one of the adolescent girls or boys who go to see the child does not go home to weep or rage, does not, in fact, go home at all.  Sometimes also a man or woman much older falls silent for a day or two, and then leaves home.  These people go out into the street, and walk down the street alone.  They keep walking, and walk straight out of the city of Omelas, through the beautiful gates" (Le Guin 602).  We, as people, cannot run into the world and save every single person who needs help.  What Le Guin is encouraging us to do is to stop contributing to the selfish and cruel nature of our communities.  The ones who walk away “seem to know where they are going" (Le Guin 602).  I think that Le Guin is telling us that we all have an innate sense of right and wrong, it's just a question of whether we choose to ignore our morals or follow them.

In conclusion, Ursula Le Guin wrote "The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas" to teach us about injustice, selfishness, and morality.  Selfishness can prevent us from doing the right thing, especially when you mix it with the will to conform.  However, we must listen to our ethics and do what we feel is right, not what everyone else is doing.

O m e l a s

In the short story "The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas", Ursula Le Guin uses the symbol of a child to symbolize poverty, and the way the child is treated to represent selfishness.  She also addresses the unnerving reality that we often accept unjust affairs merely because everyone else does.  The only people who refuse to accept the treatment of the child are the ones who walk away from Omelas-- the characters which represent the people in the world who question authority when they think something isn't right.  The ones who walk away represent those of us who are unwilling to turn a blind eye, and would rather give up all our wealth than be part of a corrupt community.

The child in the closet symbolizes the poor.  The mindset the people use to justify their treatment toward the child represents the mindset many of us have today to justify not helping the poor.

• "They would like to do something for the child.  But there is nothing they can do. . .if it were cleaned and fed and comforted. . .in that day and hour all the prosperity and beauty and delight of Omelas would wither and be destroyed."
• "To exchange all the goodness and grace of every life in Omelas for that single, small improvement: to throw away the happiness of thousands for the chance of the happiness of one: that would be to let guilt within the walls indeed."

The ones who walk away from Omelas are the ones who refuse to take part in an unjust community, and represent those of us who question authority and are not willing to comply with a community's norms if they are immoral.

• "At times one of the adolescent girls or boys who go to see the child does not go home to weep or rage, does not, in fact, go home at all.  Sometimes also a man or woman much older falls silent for a day or two, and then leaves home.  These people go out into the street, and walk down the street alone.  They keep walking, and walk straight out of the city of Omelas, through the beautiful gates."
• "They seem to know where they are going, the ones who walk away from Omelas."

M i n i v e r C h e e v y

In the poem Miniver Cheevy by E.A. Robinson, Robinson addresses the already well-known truth that  there are, in fact, some things in life that you cannot change.  But instead of dwelling on this depressing reality and living a life of sorrow and hatred, Miniver learns to accept the fact that he should make the best of what he was given, even if it is not ideal... Right?

Just kidding.

No, Miniver Cheevy takes his sadness so far, he eventually "weeps that he was ever born".
I believe that in his poem, Robinson is bringing attention to the fact that when we as people don't get what we initially desired, we tend to dwell on what could've been instead of focusing on being grateful of our actual circumstances.  We think and think and romanticize that "what if", to the point where we begin to loathe our existing situation.  And some of us might even take it as far as to resent being born...

I think the moral of the story is that we must accept that we can't control every aspect of our lives.  But just because one thing doesn't go right doesn't make it okay to let it ruin your entire life.  We must change the things we can't accept, and accept the things we cannot change.

I r o n y

Irony is often unavoidable in real life, but in writing it is a very useful tool in communicating a concept often associated with satire or sarcasm.  It is an effective way to convey a point to an audience because it puts a situation or idea into a sort of sarcastic perspective that more obviously depicts the flaws of the topic being discussed.

There are two common types of irony:

• Expectational Irony
• Oxymoron Irony

***Note: These are not legitimate terms, and EliAnalyzed© is in no way responsible if you use these in real life and look stupid.

Expectational Irony is used in literature when an author plays with your expectations, setting you up to expect one thing, and then totally throwing a curve ball.  For me, the most prominent example of how Gordimer uses this type of irony is in how she sets up the story in the first place-- it's written primarily in synopsis, just like a fairytale, and begins with "In a house, in a suburb, in a city, there were a man and his wife who loved each other very much and were living happily ever after".  And for God's sake, the story is even called "ONCE UPON A TIME".  I don't know about you, but when I hear those four magical words, I expect a pleasant story with a happy ending.  I mean, I don't know how Gordimer was raised, but I was personally brought up to believe that fairytales are not meant to be dismal, and quite frankly, TRAUMATIZING accounts of death and tragedy.  But who knows?  Maybe Gordimer is also trying to teach us a little something about expectations...

On the other hand, Oxymoron Irony is the kind of irony that has to do with contradictions, some great examples of which can be found in Alanis Morissette's song "Ironic".  Morissette describes a "no-smoking sign on your cigarette break" or "a free ride when you've already paid."  If an oxymoron is a phrase made of two opposites, then Oxymoron Irony is a situation made of opposites.  Point being, Oxymoron Irony is also apparent in "Once Upon a Time".  Gordimer depicts a family that goes to such extreme lengths for safety that they finally take it too far, and what they thought would make their son safe is what ended up killing him.  The fence in that story is such a prime example of Oxymoron Irony because it represents such a huge contradiction: the difference between safety and death.

So... What's the point?  Well, I guess Gordimer could have just told us "So basically, humans have a tendency to go to extreme lengths to get what they want, like safety.  But that never turns out great, so I wouldn't advise it.  So um, yeah."  Very convincing, right?  However, instead of doing that, Gordimer used irony.  She crushed our expectations and perplexed us with contradictions, and in doing so, was more effectively able to portray her point.

A n g e l s

I'm Eliana, and this is my blog, Elianalyziation.

I read many great works this past summer, but I particularly enjoyed "The Very Old Man With Enormous Wings" by Gabriel Garcia Marquez.  I love that the story is teeming with symbolism and can be interpreted in many different ways.  Maybe I interpreted it wrong, but frankly, I don't really care.  To me, it was a story about a selfish humanity that was blinded by their stereotypes and expectations.  The angel represented the magnificent, beautiful things in life.  Unfortunately, the people of the village, representing humanity as a whole, quickly decided that the angel didn't meet their expectations of what an angel should be, and quickly lost interest in him.  My favorite quote from the story is "Then he noticed that close up [the angel] was much too human. . . Nothing about him measured up to the proud dignity of angels."  Marquez beautifully conveys the idea that if you go about life with a closed mind, you miss out on all the beauty and wonder of the world.