Shakespeare went to sleep one night, and had a dream. In his dream a man named Claudius had killed his brother and married his wife in order to become king. Claudius’ nephew was to revenge his father's death. Shakespeare woke up gasping for air. He was sweaty and anxious. That night, he couldn't go back to sleep.
The next day, William decided to go to his good friend Freud, a well known psychologist to ask him how he would interpret his dream.
"To interpret your dream,” said Freud, you must "furnish me with the unconscious thoughts which lie behind the dream-content" of yours. Otherwise, my "interpretation is seriously restricted." Shakespeare, decided to head home.
William’s dreams got weirder as the nights went by. In one dream, as he looked at his reflection on a window, he realized all his hair was gone. Suddenly, he felt embarrassed, and started walking fast, avoiding strangers that walked by. He started having recurring dreams of his father, who had died months prior. And a few dreams were about his dead son, Hamnet.
Shakespeare started dreaming the same things over and over. He either dreamt of Claudius, his father, or his son. Sometimes, parts of one dream would merge with another. He would dream that Claudius’ nephew was his own son. But whenever the dead king (in Shakespeare’s dream, his own father) was mentioned, William switched places with his son, and found himself in the nephew’s body.
Waking up in the middle of the night, after having an exhausting dream, became routine for Shakespeare. He knew he had to do something about it. He started to write all his dreams down. After a month, he gathered all his writings and made a play out of them. It took him two years to write this play, which he called “Hamlet.”
Writing “Hamlet” was no easy task. It was hard to include creative features in this anthology of dreams. This is why, some consider this tragic masterpiece, “an artistic failure.” Another problem William had with the dream, was making it all make sense. Hamlet, the character, faced some feelings he couldn't understand, just as Shakespeare’s head was full of dreams which didn’t make sense. Since Shakespeare didn’t understand his own dream, interpreting the play is no easy task.
As soon as Shakespeare finished with the play, he went back to Freud. “In here lie all my unconscious thoughts,” Shakespeare said. “Now, interpret my dreams. Tell me what I have to do in order to have normal nights again.” Freud took his time reading "Hamlet." He read it at least three times. Keeping in mind his theories of dreams, childhood sexual desires and such, Freud reached the following conclusion:
“Hamlet is able to do anything but take vengeance upon the man who did away with his father and has taken his father's place with his mother- the man who shows him in realization the repressed desires of his own childhood. The loathing which should have driven him to revenge is thus replaced by self-reproach, by conscientious scruples, which tell him that he himself is no better than the murderer whom he is required to punish.”
He was amazed that his friend William would have come up with such a complicated phychological issue to represent his own dilemmas. The recent death of Shakespeare’s father would explain the revival or many childish feelings towards this parental figure. (Idea of Georg Brandes.) Amazingly enough, Freud didn’t have to tell Shakespeare anything in order for the dreams to stop. After writing "Hamlet", the troublesome dreams faded away and Shakespeare’s nights went back to normality.
lunes, 25 de octubre de 2010
"Words, Words, Words"
Vicarious:
-experienced in the imagination through the feelings or actions of another person :
I could glean vicarious pleasure from the struggles of my imaginary film friends.
- acting or done for another :
a vicarious atonement.
- Physiology of or pertaining to the performance by one organ of the functions normally discharged by another.
aberrations
Superfluous:
-unnecessary, esp. through being more than enough :
the purchaser should avoid asking for superfluous information.
Baffle:
-totally bewilder or perplex :
an unexplained occurrence that baffled everyone
-restrain or regulate (a fluid, a sound, etc.) :
to baffle the noise further, I pad the gunwales.
Ruse
-an action intended to deceive someone; a trick :
Eleanor tried to think of a ruse to get Paul out of the house.
Feigned:
-pretend to be affected by (a feeling, state, or injury) :
she feigned nervousness.
-archaic invent (a story or excuse).
Levity:
-humor or frivolity, esp. the treatment of a serious matter with humor or in a manner lacking due respect :
as an attempt to introduce a note of levity, the words were a disastrous flop.
Buffoonery
-behavior that is ridiculous but amusing.
Chemise:
-a dress hanging straight from the shoulders and giving the figure a uniform shape, popular in the 1920s.
-a woman's loose-fitting undergarment or nightdress, typically of silk or satin with a lace trim.
- a priest's alb or surplice.
- historical a smock.
Scanty:
-small or insufficient in quantity or amount :
scanty wages.
(of clothing) revealing; skimpy :
the women looked cold in their scanty gowns.
Piquant:
- pleasantly stimulating or exciting to the mind.
Forlorn
- pitifully sad and abandoned or lonely :
forlorn figures at bus stops.
- (of an aim or endeavor) unlikely to succeed or be fulfilled; hopeless :
a forlorn attempt to escape.
Enmity:
-the state or feeling of being actively opposed or hostile to someone or something :
enmity between Protestants and Catholics | family feuds and enmities.
FAILED ATTEMPT TO UPLOADING PICTURES.
It was working perfectly fine last year. If anyone has any idea of what could've happened, please let me know.
-experienced in the imagination through the feelings or actions of another person :
I could glean vicarious pleasure from the struggles of my imaginary film friends.
- acting or done for another :
a vicarious atonement.
- Physiology of or pertaining to the performance by one organ of the functions normally discharged by another.
aberrations
Superfluous:
-unnecessary, esp. through being more than enough :
the purchaser should avoid asking for superfluous information.
Baffle:
-totally bewilder or perplex :
an unexplained occurrence that baffled everyone
-restrain or regulate (a fluid, a sound, etc.) :
to baffle the noise further, I pad the gunwales.
Ruse
-an action intended to deceive someone; a trick :
Eleanor tried to think of a ruse to get Paul out of the house.
Feigned:
-pretend to be affected by (a feeling, state, or injury) :
she feigned nervousness.
-archaic invent (a story or excuse).
Levity:
-humor or frivolity, esp. the treatment of a serious matter with humor or in a manner lacking due respect :
as an attempt to introduce a note of levity, the words were a disastrous flop.
Buffoonery
-behavior that is ridiculous but amusing.
Chemise:
-a dress hanging straight from the shoulders and giving the figure a uniform shape, popular in the 1920s.
-a woman's loose-fitting undergarment or nightdress, typically of silk or satin with a lace trim.
- a priest's alb or surplice.
- historical a smock.
Scanty:
-small or insufficient in quantity or amount :
scanty wages.
(of clothing) revealing; skimpy :
the women looked cold in their scanty gowns.
Piquant:
- pleasantly stimulating or exciting to the mind.
Forlorn
- pitifully sad and abandoned or lonely :
forlorn figures at bus stops.
- (of an aim or endeavor) unlikely to succeed or be fulfilled; hopeless :
a forlorn attempt to escape.
Enmity:
-the state or feeling of being actively opposed or hostile to someone or something :
enmity between Protestants and Catholics | family feuds and enmities.
FAILED ATTEMPT TO UPLOADING PICTURES.
It was working perfectly fine last year. If anyone has any idea of what could've happened, please let me know.
lunes, 18 de octubre de 2010
CR
I was home alone, as usual with nothing much to do. Who would have guessed that such a big castle could be so boring. Thank God I'm a twenty-first century version of Hamlet. I don't know how my predecessors lived without the internet. Anyways, I was browsing at some pages and had the crazy idea of googling myself up. The first thing that appeared was this webpage called "To be, or not to be." I was kind of mad at fist because no one asked for my permission. I don't think that's even legal. But, I was in no mood of calling a lawyer so I clicked on this page to see what it was all about.
It turns out this webpage was designed for me. I wish they had created it sooner though. It would've been of so much help. It brought back old memories and with the memories came old fears and dilemmas. It was a questionnaire. Each question had two options. Below the questions, were the letters CR. If you clicked on it, what appear to be my inner feelings showed up in a box at the left of the screen. I don't recall telling anyone how I felt so I don't know where they got this information. But I have to say, it was pretty accurate.
I started getting really into this questionnaire. It was tough to answer. Come on Hamlet, I'd say to myself. Think. Do something. You have to get this right. Come on, click on some answer. No pressure, no pressure. Breathe. That's it. This is just a game you found online. It's no big deal. Let's see, question number one...
1. Regarding the king:
A) Kill him and seek revenge
B) "Hold my tongue" and take no action
2. If you chose B to question one, skip this question. If you chose A, choose one of the following:
A) Kill the king while he prays
B) Kill him some other time
I spent more than five minutes in this question so I decided to click on the CR. It read:
Although Hamlet realized that killing his uncle was a cruel thing to do, he tried to keep his soul as clean as possible.
"O heart, lose not thy nature; let not ever
The soul of Nero enter this firm bosom.
Let me be cruel, not unnatural;
I will speak daggers to her, but use none." (400- 404)
The nature of his heart, was to be good. Avenging his father's death was something he had to do. But that's as far as he wanted to go. Hamlet seemed to be scared of how ambitious he would get. He was afraid that he wouldn't be able to contain these spiteful feelings. Hamlet struggled with his ambition and his morality.
This dilemma is portrayed throughout Act three. We see an example of Hamlet's inability to decide as his first opportunity to kill the king approaches:
"Now might I do it pat. Now he is a-praying.
And now I’ll do ’t. And so he goes to heaven.
And so am I revenged. That would be scanned." (76-78)
Although he seems determined to slain his uncle, he hesitates and comes up with the following:
"A villain kills my father, and, for that,
I, his sole son, do this same villain send
To heaven." (79-81)
If Hamlet killed Claudius while he prayed, his soul would be at peace and he would go to heaven. Hamlet, instead of taking revenge, would be doing Claudius a favor. Although Hamlet's analysis makes sense, we get the impression that Hamlet uses this as an excuse to postpone the killing of his uncle.
Hmm. Very interesting. I do have to admit that for a good hearted person like me, committing such atrocious act wasn't easy. My mind was clear and I knew it was better to wait.
"He took father grossly, full of bread,
With all his crimes broad blown, as flush as May." (82-83)
My father died with sins in his heart. I was not going to let Claudius walk into heaven empty handed. I would wait until
He was "drunk asleep, or in his rage,
Or in th' incestuous pleasure of his bed,
At game a-swearing, or about some act
That has no relish of salvation in ’t—"
Yes. I will wait. My answer is B.
It turns out this webpage was designed for me. I wish they had created it sooner though. It would've been of so much help. It brought back old memories and with the memories came old fears and dilemmas. It was a questionnaire. Each question had two options. Below the questions, were the letters CR. If you clicked on it, what appear to be my inner feelings showed up in a box at the left of the screen. I don't recall telling anyone how I felt so I don't know where they got this information. But I have to say, it was pretty accurate.
I started getting really into this questionnaire. It was tough to answer. Come on Hamlet, I'd say to myself. Think. Do something. You have to get this right. Come on, click on some answer. No pressure, no pressure. Breathe. That's it. This is just a game you found online. It's no big deal. Let's see, question number one...
1. Regarding the king:
A) Kill him and seek revenge
B) "Hold my tongue" and take no action
2. If you chose B to question one, skip this question. If you chose A, choose one of the following:
A) Kill the king while he prays
B) Kill him some other time
I spent more than five minutes in this question so I decided to click on the CR. It read:
Although Hamlet realized that killing his uncle was a cruel thing to do, he tried to keep his soul as clean as possible.
"O heart, lose not thy nature; let not ever
The soul of Nero enter this firm bosom.
Let me be cruel, not unnatural;
I will speak daggers to her, but use none." (400- 404)
The nature of his heart, was to be good. Avenging his father's death was something he had to do. But that's as far as he wanted to go. Hamlet seemed to be scared of how ambitious he would get. He was afraid that he wouldn't be able to contain these spiteful feelings. Hamlet struggled with his ambition and his morality.
This dilemma is portrayed throughout Act three. We see an example of Hamlet's inability to decide as his first opportunity to kill the king approaches:
"Now might I do it pat. Now he is a-praying.
And now I’ll do ’t. And so he goes to heaven.
And so am I revenged. That would be scanned." (76-78)
Although he seems determined to slain his uncle, he hesitates and comes up with the following:
"A villain kills my father, and, for that,
I, his sole son, do this same villain send
To heaven." (79-81)
If Hamlet killed Claudius while he prayed, his soul would be at peace and he would go to heaven. Hamlet, instead of taking revenge, would be doing Claudius a favor. Although Hamlet's analysis makes sense, we get the impression that Hamlet uses this as an excuse to postpone the killing of his uncle.
Hmm. Very interesting. I do have to admit that for a good hearted person like me, committing such atrocious act wasn't easy. My mind was clear and I knew it was better to wait.
"He took father grossly, full of bread,
With all his crimes broad blown, as flush as May." (82-83)
My father died with sins in his heart. I was not going to let Claudius walk into heaven empty handed. I would wait until
He was "drunk asleep, or in his rage,
Or in th' incestuous pleasure of his bed,
At game a-swearing, or about some act
That has no relish of salvation in ’t—"
Yes. I will wait. My answer is B.
domingo, 10 de octubre de 2010
Flexible Hamlet
We've just started reading Hamlet. But from the clips we've seen and the scenes we've read, it's safe to say that numerous versions of the play can exist, and they can all keep Hamlet's essence. There are some differences in Kenneth Branagh's 1996 version of Hamlet and Gregory Doran's 2010 version (the most evident would have to be the security camera). In one, Hamlet wears a black turtleneck suite. In the other, he wears a pair of jeans and an orange t-shirt. Both Hamlets are in luxurious castles and represent the rich boy of the time. Although they differ in looks, they both transmit Hamlet's rage toward his uncle, his mother, and the situation overall.
sábado, 9 de octubre de 2010
Appreciating Shakespeare From Jail
When you're acting, you have to find a way to let yourself go, so there is space for a new character to take over your mind and body. You have to become someone else. Talk like someone else, think, feel, act like someone else. But in order to do this, you have to create a connector between the character and the actor. Some characters are harder to interpret than others. This all depends on how strongly you can relate to the character you have to impersonate. It's easier to interpret a character if you’ve been them already, because you can directly relate to the situation they're facing. This is the case of the prisoners at the Missouri East Correctional Institution. For them, there's very little difference between Hamlet and real life.
It's very interesting to see what Hamlet means to the prisoners. In some way, the play is like therapy to them. As one of them said, Hamlet keeps them sane. It makes them realize they aren't stupid, th but uneducated and most importantly, it makes them face their past.
These man are playing roles they've played all their life. They truly mean the lines they say. They've been through what Hamlet's has been through, done what Claudius has done. They are murderers playing the roles of murderers. Can there be a better interpretation?
A relationship has been created between the prisoners and Hamlet. They help each other out. The men bring Hamlet to life and in return, Hamlet provides the opportunity to express themselves. Through Shakespeare's words, they are able to get across their most deepest emotions.
It's very interesting to see what Hamlet means to the prisoners. In some way, the play is like therapy to them. As one of them said, Hamlet keeps them sane. It makes them realize they aren't stupid, th but uneducated and most importantly, it makes them face their past.
These man are playing roles they've played all their life. They truly mean the lines they say. They've been through what Hamlet's has been through, done what Claudius has done. They are murderers playing the roles of murderers. Can there be a better interpretation?
A relationship has been created between the prisoners and Hamlet. They help each other out. The men bring Hamlet to life and in return, Hamlet provides the opportunity to express themselves. Through Shakespeare's words, they are able to get across their most deepest emotions.
domingo, 3 de octubre de 2010
Krapp Will Always Be Krapp
It isn't until the very end of the play that Krapp mentions he's listening to old tapes of himself. But before he does, there are many details (clues, we'll call them), which lead us to believe the man we are looking at, and the man inside the tape are the same person.
Clue #1:
The bananas.
The voice in the tape recorder says: "Have just eaten I regret to say three bananas and only with difficulty restrained a fourth. Fatal things for a man with my condition." Prior to this, we saw the old man do the same, therefore we assume that the man we hear through the tape recorder is the same man who listens to it. But, how can it be? Both voices are so different from one another. The man in the tape seems to be young, with an almost eloquent voice, while the other man's voice is "cracked," with a "distinctive intonation." Although the voice has changed, the habits haven't. Apart from this compulsive need of eating bananas, we encounter a second similarity.
Clue #2:
Both seem to have the habit of recording and listening to tapes. These recordings function as a diary.
Tape Krapp says:
"Just been listening to an old year, passages at random."
Later, Old Krapp records:
"Just been listening to that stupid bastard I took myself for thirty years ago, hard to beleive I was ever as bad as that."
Both consume themselves in these tapes, which are after all, the past.
Old Krapp seems to be mad at his young self. He seems to have hard feelings towards the past. Towards the way he used to think and act. Towards the way he used to love.
Clue #3:
The light above the table. It's something that stands out through all that loneliness and darkness. "The new light above my table is a great improvement." Says the tape, and Krapp looks above, where he finds the light. "With all this darkness around me I feel less alone. (Pause.) In a way. (Pause.) I love to get up and move about in it, then back here to . . . (hesitates) . . . me. (pause.) Krapp." Even this young version of Krapp was lonely. He goes into the light, but then goes back to himself. Krapp. He says his name with despise, with repugnance. not to mention Krapp is oddly similar to crap, thus making us see him in such a manner.
Although both are the same person, they have slight differences (the voice was mentioned already) which can be attributed to the experiences Krapp had in different moments of his life.
Difference #1:
The tape speaks: "Shall I sing when I am her age, if I ever am? No. (Pause.) Did I sing as a boy? No. (Pause.) Did I ever sing? No." Singing, in this context, seems to be an act of happiness. We've agreed that both tape Krapp and old Krapp are gloomy, therefore what tape Krapp says makes sense- he doesn't sing. But in the play, old Krapp does sing. Twice. His song isn't joyful,
"Now the day is over,
Night is drawing nigh-igh."
but it still is a song.
Difference #2:
There are moments where Krapp looks up words in the dictionary he hears in the tape. If it was he who made the recordings and said those words, why is he looking them up?
Difference # 3:
There comes a point where the man in the tape speaks poetically, in such a beautiful manner.
"Past midnight. Never knew such silence. The earth might be uninhabited."
Although the old man seems touched by words he said years ago, and uneasy with how everything turned out, he was another side to him with which he struggles. A determined side, one that tries to convince himself that he wouldn't relive those years, "when there was a chance of happiness."
This whole situation: a man listening to his young self speak, captures the transformation of the human being as he experiences new things. The differences between the tape and Krapp mentioned above emphasize a change in the character. Both obsessively ate bananas, recorded tapes, and felt lonely. But the voice in the tape, so clean and clear, used complex words, and phrased his ideas in such a way, that we were lead to believe he was a smart man. We imagine something very different to what we see: a creaky voiced, filthy man. We can refer to the voice in the tape and the man listening to it as two separate characters, but they are after all, the same person. The same Krapp at different times.
Clue #1:
The bananas.
The voice in the tape recorder says: "Have just eaten I regret to say three bananas and only with difficulty restrained a fourth. Fatal things for a man with my condition." Prior to this, we saw the old man do the same, therefore we assume that the man we hear through the tape recorder is the same man who listens to it. But, how can it be? Both voices are so different from one another. The man in the tape seems to be young, with an almost eloquent voice, while the other man's voice is "cracked," with a "distinctive intonation." Although the voice has changed, the habits haven't. Apart from this compulsive need of eating bananas, we encounter a second similarity.
Clue #2:
Both seem to have the habit of recording and listening to tapes. These recordings function as a diary.
Tape Krapp says:
"Just been listening to an old year, passages at random."
Later, Old Krapp records:
"Just been listening to that stupid bastard I took myself for thirty years ago, hard to beleive I was ever as bad as that."
Both consume themselves in these tapes, which are after all, the past.
Old Krapp seems to be mad at his young self. He seems to have hard feelings towards the past. Towards the way he used to think and act. Towards the way he used to love.
Clue #3:
The light above the table. It's something that stands out through all that loneliness and darkness. "The new light above my table is a great improvement." Says the tape, and Krapp looks above, where he finds the light. "With all this darkness around me I feel less alone. (Pause.) In a way. (Pause.) I love to get up and move about in it, then back here to . . . (hesitates) . . . me. (pause.) Krapp." Even this young version of Krapp was lonely. He goes into the light, but then goes back to himself. Krapp. He says his name with despise, with repugnance. not to mention Krapp is oddly similar to crap, thus making us see him in such a manner.
Although both are the same person, they have slight differences (the voice was mentioned already) which can be attributed to the experiences Krapp had in different moments of his life.
Difference #1:
The tape speaks: "Shall I sing when I am her age, if I ever am? No. (Pause.) Did I sing as a boy? No. (Pause.) Did I ever sing? No." Singing, in this context, seems to be an act of happiness. We've agreed that both tape Krapp and old Krapp are gloomy, therefore what tape Krapp says makes sense- he doesn't sing. But in the play, old Krapp does sing. Twice. His song isn't joyful,
"Now the day is over,
Night is drawing nigh-igh."
but it still is a song.
Difference #2:
There are moments where Krapp looks up words in the dictionary he hears in the tape. If it was he who made the recordings and said those words, why is he looking them up?
Difference # 3:
There comes a point where the man in the tape speaks poetically, in such a beautiful manner.
"Past midnight. Never knew such silence. The earth might be uninhabited."
Although the old man seems touched by words he said years ago, and uneasy with how everything turned out, he was another side to him with which he struggles. A determined side, one that tries to convince himself that he wouldn't relive those years, "when there was a chance of happiness."
This whole situation: a man listening to his young self speak, captures the transformation of the human being as he experiences new things. The differences between the tape and Krapp mentioned above emphasize a change in the character. Both obsessively ate bananas, recorded tapes, and felt lonely. But the voice in the tape, so clean and clear, used complex words, and phrased his ideas in such a way, that we were lead to believe he was a smart man. We imagine something very different to what we see: a creaky voiced, filthy man. We can refer to the voice in the tape and the man listening to it as two separate characters, but they are after all, the same person. The same Krapp at different times.
Suscribirse a:
Entradas (Atom)