How is it a tragedy? Everybody dies immediately. What’s the reason that Shakespeare did this? The 16-17th century audience was stupid. Why was I upset at the ending? Anyone could have come up with this boring end. The only reason a 16th-17th century enjoyed this ending is because they would have been tired from paying close attention. Instead, they get a fight to the death. Of course I was upset with the haste that the play ended with. In about a span of 5 minutes Hamlet, Claudius, Gertrude, and Laertes die. If this is not an annoying quick wrap up of a great play, I don’t know what is? (Maybe I would enjoy watching a fight rather than reading about one.)

The most annoying thing I found was that Oephilia was dead. Yes, they introduced it late in Act 4, but it was still too sudden. I expected some epic soliloquy. “O Hamlet, what has’t thou done to me? The sun shines when your face doth show, but clouds hath covered that sun in haste. Mine own father killed by mine greatest love, o the agony. I cannot go on like the wretch I am. Ophelia falls in the lake. Take me, fair lake, for the sky I wish to join” (what should have been in Act 4/5). Instead, I get a gravedigging clown. What gives? Shakespeare, I wrote something that should have been yours. I can’t copy Shakespeare, but this is what it would be like in a nutshell.

A reaction to the overall play: Why didn’t the relationship between Hamlet and Oephelia flourish? I thought that it was a relationship that could have been. However, the timing was terribly off. Oephilia loved Hamlet when his father died, his mother remarried quickly, and the kingdom is in turmoil. Even though Hamlet was hitting on her, he never could have truly loved her unless his attitude changed. I expected a Shakespearian relationship like Romeo and Juliet, but instead I didn’t get a relationship.

Overall I enjoyed this play (and much more than other plays such as Romeo and Juliet). I was totally hooked in Act I, but it lost its touch in Act V. I am overall happy with the play, but it could be improved greatly in Act V.

Claudius was not cool after the play. He totally took the bait, so now he knows to get rid of Hamlet. After the murder of Polonius, it’s time to execute Hamlet in England. Claudius knows that if he stayed in that room, he would have been in serious danger. In Claudius’ shoes, I would do the same. Letting a psycho who knows about your murder and wants to kill you go on the loose is a bad idea. No matter what, Claudius must get rid of Hamlet. It also needs to be done in England, because everybody at home loves Hamlet.

Poor Ophelia has gone mad, as seen in scene V. She slips in and calls for Hamlet, obviously still loving Hamlet. Also she is upset about her father’s death by her love Hamlet. Naturally she is insane. She has gone insane because of what society did to her. Laertes and Polonius told her not to sleep with Hamlet. Society has told her to be a good little girl when she wanted Hamlet. Then Hamlet went insane and killed her father. These events took a toll on Ophelia through collateral damage. Now she slipped into madness, singing and saying things like “They say the owl was a baker’s daughter” (127), coming from the legend in the bible. Personally I find much sympathy for Ophelia’s tragic case of insanity, because Claudius and Hamlet are murderers and she’s innocent.

Whether ’tis nobler in the mind to suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune or to take arms against a sea of troubles, and by opposing end them. (76)

Hamlet ponders whether it would be worth it to live and face all the problems he is facing. Granted, Hamlet is extremely troubled and faces issues that nobody should have to face. His father died, his mother looks to be in on the act (at least Hamlet believes, as seen in the play scene), he is confused about his love of Ophelia, and he’s going a little insane (or very insane). That statement translates for Hamlet to give up and end his life or solve his issues. Later in the soliloquy:

To sleep (death) perchance to dream: ay, there’s the rub! For in that sleep of death what dreams may come when we have shuffled off this mortal coil, must give us pause. There’s the respect that makes calamity of so long life. For who would bear the whips and scorns of time, the oppressor’s wrong…(77)

What a philisophical statement. Why do people keep living so long? According to Hamlet it is because we are unsure about the afterlife. Then he goes on and on about the harshness of life and so on, but I feel that he is missing a key point to life. People have a good time while living, or at least most do. Hamlet only drags on about how tough life is, rather than how great it is to be alive. It shows a lot about the pessimism in Hamlet, because most people are happier than that. Definitely the death of his father carries much sorrow in Hamlet. While it may be that life is difficult, it is only difficult at points. Now, he may be working himself to gain courage and actually perform suicide. I doubt that, but reading it a certain way I can see that point.

Later he comes to the conclusion that people live only because of the unknown afterlife. One interesting observation is that he never mentions anything near “I want to kill myself”. However, it’s obvious he is talking about suicide. Also he is philosophical, being indirect when alone. With other characters, maybe he doesn’t want to show his true motives, but in this scene he believes he is alone (even if the king and Polonius are spying). The only conclusion I come up with is that Hamlet is so confused about his situation that he can’t even reason with himself. The passage shows his confusion, his suicide potential, and all the pessimism in Hamlet.

One theme expressed is pretending and madness, all at the same time. Hamlet says he is only crazy at certain times. Some examples of how wrong Hamlet is:

I am but mad north-north-west. When the wind is southerly I know a hawk from a handsaw

What a fine job he is doing. It’s almost as if the things he plans on doing and the things he says make him INSANE!!! His intentions are to have the time of his life with Ophelia, to avenge a ghost and kill the king of Denmark, and to find no enjoyment in talking to people. Hamlet cannot flip the switch like he claims. He has to be pretending to be sane, because his intentions and conversations are insane.

Polonius: My lord, I have news to tell you.   Hamlet: My lord, I have news to tell you: when Roscius was an actor in Rome. (64)

Very rude for somebody to say, and honestly he is thinking in very weird ways. Hamlet is clearly mocking Polonius, and as Polonius continues to speak Hamlet continues to make fun of him. His insanity is there throughout that conversation.

How about another pretender, Fortinbras!!! I’m not sure how it will unfold, but pause for a second. Imagine, you’re a young and ambitious Prince. Your father (the old king) died, and you want to avenge him by taking old lands stolen in his time. Of course this is crazy to the present king (uncle), and so diplomacy rules the day. But, a great opportunity lies in using your army. The king wants to invade Poland (make use of the grand army). Shakespeare made it so that Poland borders Denmark. However, you need boats to get from Norway to Denmark. Poland borders at least a bit of coast, so wouldn’t it make more sense to go by boat to Poland. Just a hunch, but the king of Denmark should be VERY WORRIED ABOUTBETRAYAL!!! Shakespeare really enjoys making baffling fools, and this is a great example. Pretend to invade Poland, but really invade your arch-nemesis Denmark.

First thing’s first, Fortinbras has threatened to take back his stolen Norwegian land. Personally, I think this is an empty threat, but who knows. My best guess is that the Norwegians will be nothing more than bandits. The true king will control Fortinbras. Personally if I were Fortinbras I would give up and move on with my life.

Later there is the grand speech by the new king. The king gives his speech about how Denmark is a shaky land, but it will stand strong. Then he states he will marry the queen. We already know Hamlet is not going to like this, but I think Hamlet will do more than groan. He took to heart what the ghost king said, so he will kill the uncle. Then I think the queen is going to do something tragic (maybe marry the man next to her). She may perform suicide if the uncle dies also. She can’t get over two husband deaths (unless she loved neither, in which case maybe she’ll marry the man next to her). This will be the main action of the play, finding out how and when Hamlet decides to kill.

Already I sense Romeo and Juliet with Hamlet and Ophelia. From Second City, I already know Ophelia kills herself. So it isn’t difficult to guess that she doesn’t follow Laertes or Polonius’s advice. Instead, she’s going to see Hamlet at some official dinner or party, make-out in a span of two minutes meeting eachother, sleeping together, and then both commiting suicide. Sounds an awful like Romeo and Juliet so far, and what do ya know; Shakespeare wrote both plays :O.

I have no idea what will happen with Fortinbras, but I have a gut feeling that the love and revenge of this play will turn out the way I plan. It’s Shakespeare, all of his tragedies are like this. It will be interesting to see how things turn out !!!

I didn’t spend as much time on this project, yet I learned the same amount that I would have writing a paper. Also having classmates looking on my posts, so awesome. The informality of this assignment allowed me to blossom. Blogging is becoming a popular trend, and now that I have a blog, I can write about sports !!! Now I can write my blog about my Lions hopes (trades, offseason, etc.) Jean Valentine is not talked about much, and on MEL I was limited to about 3 sources. But other than that little obstacle I found this project great. Another thing I liked about the blog was pacing. Instead of working ONLY on the weekend, I could work easily throughout the week. With a paper, I was stressed to do at least 5 hours of work, but no work over the week. Honestly I do not see how to improve this project, because I found the post work fair and fun. One thing I may change is finding other blogs to comment on, because there is almost no way to submit a comment without creating another account. Anyway I see a bright future for this blog assignment.

to buy all products necessary

but also see the people

the people–they

create the bustling market

bartering      socializing       purchasing

it transforms an empty building into

a metropolis of human activity

the tomato stand, the pottery show

Yet not all lives forever

because the market must close

and at the end of market season

a forever sleep will show

Tucker Gaegauf (attempt to copy Jean Valentine, though that is a very difficult task)

I attempted to capture the style of the poems (punctuation), but she is much more creative than I am. So I tried to make a message of cycles, which can resemble Valentine. Honestly I found copying her difficult.

Valentine says works by Elizabeth Bishop and “confessional poets” such as Robert Lowell and Sylvia Plath influenced her early writings. But after her first collection, she says she began to “develop a voice of [her] own.” (blog)

It seems that women poets are especially important to you.

JV: I made friends with Adrienne and Jane right at the beginning. But I didn’t know about many women who were writing poetry. I was very late finding out about Muriel Rukeyser. Jane and Adrienne were very important as living friends. And then Elizabeth Bishop was always important. I carried her books around for years. Eleanor Ross Taylor has always been important to me. (interview)

Both Valentine and Bishop were lonely in their childhood, which allows the two to relate to the other’s story. Responding to Klein’s question about Elizabeth Bishop and homesickness, Valentine says, “I felt a longing for connection … Maybe [Bishop] being an orphan and my being … whatever” (MEL). Valentine’s whatever refers to her difficult childhood. “Valentine was ten when her father returned from the Second World War, suffering from post-traumatic stress. ‘It was a very sad and awful time for [her parents] and for all of us, so I got out of the house as much as I could?’” (MEL). The two can relate very well that way and both have empathy for the other’s situation. 

Between the difficult childhood and the realistic style that the two have, they have to be similar. Valentine has even stated her love for Bishop’s writings and the influence. Bishop probably does not know Valentine much, but that’s okay because Bishop died before Valentine’s major works.

I’m not sure our poets have too much in common like you suggested, but both poets are creative and out there. My poet, Valentine, discusses a lot about mysticsm and dreams, while your poet deals with social and political issues. Anyway they both are good at what they do and both express poetry in a fun and entertaining way. Mine uses unusual metaphor and simple vocabulary while your’s uses lush vocabulary. Both do explain an issue hidden in there. It would be cool if your poet and my poet met in the New England area.

To Stacey: 3/11

Stacey, maybe both of our poets have a similar life. Both were professors, both lived in the Midwest (Valentine in Chicago, yours in Detroit), and both wrote mystic poetry. It may be a bit of a stretch, but our poets could be kind of similar. Anyway my poet goes into mysticsm and makes up metaphor, so maybe there’s nothing in common. I’m interested to see if your poetry is at all similar to mine.

To DJ for 3/18 post

DJ, I took the time to read your poem, and it isn’t similar in style to Valentine. However, both have done feminist works obviously. Also Piercy is a lot more detailed about descriptions. I really enjoy reading your poet, and I agree that she writes gorgeous lines that I could not even come up with.

To Gabe 3/18

Hey Gabe, I finally took a look at your poetry. I knew that there would be virtually nothing in common with Jean Valentine, but I like the historical analysis you bring to the poem. I agree with your interpretation of Andrew Jackson, and a comparison to Malcolm X is perfect. Valentine has refered to political issues in her poetry, like Vietnam, so that could be a similarity between our two poets. Anyway that’s a very interesting poet you found.

To random blog on The Harvard Crimson

That’s really cool that Jean Valentine’s life is shown in a narrative. I see possible feminism links with her library ban in the 50’s. Also she comments on a “Conservative, white world”, which may explain why she breaks the barriers of poetry. The reference to a poor writing of anti-war in Vietnam proves her love of weaving current issues into her poetry. Also I learned she likes structure in her writing, not free verse. While I did not learn anything about the style of Valentine, this blog taught me some more about Valentine as a person.

To random blog on The Ithican Online

I like how this blog reveals Valentine’s willingness to go out into the real world. It also shows how Valentine goes about her business as a poet. She says it comes to her naturally, not in a forced way. If I was interested in becoming a poet, her words of wisdom would help my decision making. The blog also helped prove my point that Valentine loves Dickinson (and she writes stylistically like her too).

Trim my hooves

  The Definition of Beauty, is
   That Definition is none–       The dash
   Of Heaven, easing Analysis,
   Since Heaven and He             Reference to religion there
   Are One–                    No period!!!
Emily Dickinson

  Anyway the comparison of the two shows obvious stylistic comparisons. Some have called Dickinson a stylistic genius because of bad grammar. Since this is not an English essay, but poetry, it is okay for the two of them to have bad grammar. According to William Franke,

“Dickinson’s highly originalwriting makes her a maddeningly difficult poet, one whom eminent critics confess baffles them. Yet her poems become startlingly readable when read according to their apophatic grammar and rhetoric: the words and phrases fall into place–the place they make for what they necessarily leave unsaid but let show up distinctly silhouetted in their hollows and shadows” (Franke).

Dickinson and Valentine are both very difficult poets to understand completely. Some of the essence of their poetry is the lack of understanding due to the originality. As the Harvard Review points out

Valentine began her career writing rhymed and metered verse, then shook off that style for a more experimental free verse. “First Love,” the first poem in Dream Barker, is especially moving. It ends with the lines that are already signature Valentine: “How deep we met, how dark, / How wet! before the world began” (Harvard Review).

Another similarity between the two is there use of religion. Both have poetry hinting toward god or heaven in their poetry. Emily Dickinson is a poet that believes in a supreme being (god), and William Franke describes her faith as “apophatic”, which means that there is “speculation concerning the ineffable One as supreme principle of reality”. “Harold Bloom employs apophatic terms to describe Dickinson’s poetry when he comments that her “unique transport, her Sublime, is founded upon her unnaming of all out certitudes into so many blanks; it gives her, and her authentic readers, another way to see, almost, in the dark” (308-09, MEL). As seen in the poem Dickinson clearly states “Heaven and he are one”, which shows the religion. Valentine writes “The red and blue fire around my head this minute vanishing…I befriended it”, which I interpret as going into a supernatural world befriending a higher being. Some of Valentine’s other poetry is better at showing religion, like her poem “The Growing Christ of Tzintzuntzan”. Valentine’s sort of mysticsm is more hidden, but still there. Also it is less Christian based then Dickinson, using more generic religion and wondering and not a specific god.

Anyone interested in poets who defy the rules of grammar, Jean Valentine and Emily Dickinson are ones to read. Religious people, read a bit of Dickinson and Valentine. The two poets are different people. Valentine is a professor in New York, a person who has put her works into the world with a website and some collections. Dickinson was a more isolated person than Valentine, a stay at home housewife probably huddling in her home studying the bible, baking cookies for the family, and writing poetry that never got published until her death. They come together in their discussion of religion, god, and definitely the supernatural world of Heaven. They also come together in breaking conventional grammar, making third graders scream to their teachers that famous poets don’t care about English rules.