B Bell - Hamlet Acts I and II

In Act II, Hamlet is considered mad by most of his peers. Whether by Hamlet's purposeful scheming or an actual madness caused by realizing his father was murdered, he decides to act the part. Compare some of the justifications that Hamlet's family and peers use to the conclusions that they draw and the actions they plan to take. Do you think they were too quick to judge or their evidence didn't match up to their conclusions? Basically, was any argument they gave to Hamlet's madness a sound one? Were they justified in their assumptions?

If you think they were quick to act, examine any evidence you find later in the novel, and how it could have provided a better argument. If you don't, could there have been a better conclusion or course of action, taking into account the characterization of everyone involved. Consider how the course of the novel would be affected by a better course of action or a difference in plot.



And here's a sneak peek at the Spectrum's cover (which is my way of saying sorry this blog is late):
http://i39.tinypic.com/n483dw.png

F Bell- Hamlet blog- due by April 2

Throughout Acts I and II, Shakespeare employs a great deal of rhetorical devices, especially figurative language, allusions, and prosody.
"A little month, or ere those shoes were old
With which she followed my poor father's body,
Like Niobe, all tears:- why she, even she-
O God! a beast, that wants discourse of reason,
Would have mourn'd longer- married with my uncle..." (lines 147-151, page 1598)

By using a mythological allusion to Niobe, Shakespeare is able to more easily explain the situation surrounding the death of Hamlet's father and his mother's remarriage.

Find an example of such devices and explore how it helps to further develop the character or situation. How is it used? What is its purpose?

This blog is being moderated by Kelsey and Anne Stuart

Shakespeare - F Bell

Though Shakespeare is one of the most renowned playwrights in the English language, very little is actually known about his life. Historians know that he was born in Stratford-upon-Avon in 1564, married Anne Hathaway at age 18, had three children, and wrote some of the most famous plays in the world. However, even this has been called into question, as many scholars now claim that people like Francis Bacon or Christopher Marlowe actually wrote his plays for him. Because of this lack of information about Shakespeare's life, our best way of learning about Shakespeare is to read his plays. Shakespeare left behind thousands of words, and though they do not describe him directly, they offer us the chance to understand Shakespeare and infer details about his life and personality through what he wrote.

As a way to further explore Shakespeare's personality and have some fun as well, this week's blog post is going to incorporate some creative writing. Think about what Shakespeare would be like if he lived today. Would he still be a famous playwright? Would he even be a playwright, or would he have a different job, such as a screenwriter? Would he still live in London, or would he have moved somewhere else, like New York or Paris? Briefly tell us about your vision of a modern Shakespeare. Be creative and have fun with this!

This blog is being moderated by Andrea and Meera.

B Bell - Shakespeare- David & Emily

A tragedy is defined as a dramatic composition dealing with a serious or somber theme, typically that of a great person destined through a flaw of character or conflict with some overpowering force, as fate or society, to downfall or destruction. Using this definition, analyze Shakespeare's plays, more specifically Hamlet, and in what aspects they are a tragedy. Use specific examples.