Hamlets Anger and Morality in William Shakespeares Hamlet Essay

Hamlet's Anger and Morality in William Shakespeare's Hamlet In Shakespeare's Hamlet, Hamlet is faced with emotional and physical hardship. The suffering that he endures causes his character to develop certain idiosyncrasies. Morality has a significant importance to Hamlet. At the beginning of the play, Hamlet possesses a strong sense of morality. A sense that is stronger than all other characters. Hamlet's actions and feelings are controlled by his morality. His morality grows weaker as the play progresses. Hamlet's opinions toward the characters within the play are determined by his moral standpoint. As the play goes on, Hamlet's tendency of thinking too much causes him to become mad. Hamlet's focal problem is his madness. As the play progresses, Hamlet's moral perspective on life begins to alter. The first change in his morality occurred following Hamlet's first visit from the ghost. Hamlet is told by the ghost to avenge his father's murder. If Hamlet's morality was as strong as it was in the beginning of the play, he would have immediately opposed the ghost. However, he did not oppose the thought of murdering his father's murderer. Hamlet will have a continuous struggle whether to carry out the ghost's deed or to act morally throughout the play. If, throughout, Hamlet is prevented from enacting his revenge by the discomforting ratios that his literary imitations generate, he is equally prevented from repudiating his revenge by his inability to emancipate himself from his father, to be other than an imitation of what has generated him(Kastan 204). Toward the end of the play, Hamlet has abandoned the strong sense of morality that he once possessed. He no longer debated the morality of his every action. His true ... ...aertes killed him physically. Bibliography: Bloom, Harold. Hamlet. New York: Chelsea House, 1990. Elliott, G. R.. Scourge and Minister. New York, New York: AMS Press, Inc., 1965. Hazlitt, William."Character's of Shakespeare" Hamlet. Ed by Harold Bloom. New York: Chelsea House, 1990. Jones, Ernest. Hamlet and Oedipus. New York: Norton, 1949. Kastan, David Scott, ed. Critical Essays on Shakespeare's" Hamlet. New York: G.K. Hall, 1995. Chapter: "Hamlet and Our Problems" Kastan, David Scott, ed. Critical Essays on Shakespeare's Hamlet. New York: G.K. Hall, 1995. Chapter: "Hamlet and the Imitation of Revenge" Lidz, Theodore. Hamlet's Enemy. Madison, Connecticut: International Universities Press, Inc. 1975. Luyster, Robert W. Hamlet and Man's Being Lanham, MD: University Press of America, 1984.

The Crucible – How does Miller effectively create a sense of tension and conflict between John and Elizabeth Proctor at the beginning of Act two?

Miller effectively creates a sense of tension and conflict between John and Elizabeth Proctor at the beginning of Act two. Act two follows directly on from a very highly charged and climatic note. At the end of act one Abigail and the girls accuse many people in Salem of being witches and a state of hysteria is reached. It is therefore a surprise that act two is not a court scene or trial, merely a domestic scene between John and Elizabeth Proctor. This variation is a good thing I believe as it helps to keep the reader interested and keeps the play from becoming monogamous. This is a very important scene. Miller I believe created this scene and the love interest between Abigail and John Proctor to make the ending of the play far more dramatic. If a significant rift is created between John and Elizabeth, then surely the ending will become more impressive, because as soon as they have conquered their problems and regained trust in each other following John's fight to free Elizabeth, John is hanged. This scene is also important to help us understand Elizabeth's dilemma in act three when Danforth asks her whether John had an affair with Abigail. John is unable to tell her what to say so Elizabeth has to decide for herself whether or not to tell the truth, she is unaware that John has confessed to the affair so denies it happened so as not to incriminate him. Act two helps us to understand that she most definitely did know about the affair and had not forgotten, so therefore is lying to protect John in act three despite their rocky relationship. The audience have already by act two heard only bad words about Elizabeth, so it is likely that they have come to the conclusion that she is not a very nice person. This is due to Abigail bad mouthing Elizabeth and saying that she is â€Å"†¦ a sickly wife† and a â€Å"†¦ cold snivelling woman†. Because we do not meet Elizabeth until later on in the play we only have the opportunity to form an opinion on Elizabeth's character from what Abigail says about her, which is unfortunately all malicious and derogatory. The language used by Miller in the crucible is archaic, rural American. Because the play is based upon events, which took place around 311 years ago, to make it seem realistic it is crucial that miller does use such language. An example of the language used, is when John says to Elizabeth, â€Å"Aye†¦ its warm as blood beneath the clods†, this is definitely not an expression we would use today. Although nowadays we may not understand the language used by Miller perfectly it is important for him to use it in order for the play to become genuine and believable. In his autobiography Timebends, Miller discusses the language he found in the court records. He said that he wanted â€Å"to study the actual words of the interrogations, a gnarled way of speaking† Miller also admitted to unintentionally, â€Å"elaborating a few grammatical forms himself, the double negatives especially†, although Act two is not a court scene I believe that Millers research into the language of the inhabitants of Salem in the 17th Century helped the play to achieve its sense of authenticity. It is important for Miller to create tension within the play to keep the audience interested; he uses this technique in Act two with great affect. The audience is already aware of the Proctors strained relationship following John's affair with Abigail, and Miller highlights the damage that has been done by the affair perfectly in this scene to create a excruciating sense of tension. At the start of Act two Miller using stage directions and has John on his return from the field taste the meal the Elizabeth has been preparing, he is displeased with it so seasons it. This appears at first perfectly normal and harmless to the audience, however when John hears Elizabeth coming downstairs he jumps away from the stove and proceeds to wash his hands. It becomes obvious to the audience at this point that their relationship is so strained that John racked with guilt about his affair with Abigail avoids doing anything at all which might aggravate or offend Elizabeth. This huge effort on John's behalf to not offend Elizabeth is blatant when he tells her that the rabbit is â€Å"well seasoned† Elizabeth gratefully accepts this praise replying that she â€Å"took great care†, this is an awkward scene because both are trying to be friendly to one another but it is easy to see they are uncomfortable in each others presence. It is ironic that John complimented her on the seasoning on the rabbit, since he seasoned it himself; this in particular highlights the conflict between them. At first glance the proctor household appears homely, welcoming and peaceful. John returns home to work and finds his supper ready, cooked for him by his wife who has just finished singing their children to sleep. However this is all very misleading, the conflict between the proctors is highlighted at the very start of act two with the use of monosyllabic sentences from Elizabeth in reply to Johns attempts at conversation. John, full of good intentions, begins to tell Elizabeth about the farm and tries to engage in conversation with her, however she meekly replies to his questions with short, abrupt sentences such as â€Å"That's well†, â€Å"Aye, it would† and â€Å"Aye, it is†. By manipulating the sentence structure Miller is able to show Elizabeth's reluctance to speak to her husband, and highlight the distance and awkwardness present between them. After complimenting Elizabeth on the meal John, talks about the farm and says with a grin â€Å"I mean to please you Elizabeth. And she answers, â€Å"I know it John. † However, before she answers, she pauses, and â€Å"finds it hard to say. † This means that she might not think he honestly wants to please her, or make their marriage work. Since this is quite a dramatic moment, I think that on stage at this moment the lighting should focus on Elizabeth, and if present the orchestra should be silent to emphasize her hesi tation. It becomes very clear in this scene that John is desperately trying to regain Elizabeth's trust. The fact that she is cold and distant towards him creates a great sense of strain and the conflict is plain to see. Miller is able to illustrate this conflict between them by using stage directions, he has John walk over to Elizabeth and kiss her, Elizabeth receives his affection with disappointment, she is still cold and unforgiving. Miller shows us that words are not necessary to convey feelings, the expressions of the actors and their body language is enough and can sometimes be more convincing in a subtle way. When I watched the film made about the play it struck me that in the scene between John and Elizabeth a table had been positioned between them, this acted as a physical barrier. This is actually of great significance and subtly shows the audience that there are obstacles that stand in the way of the proctors, keeping them apart, namely Abigail. Watching the film helped me to see that stage props can be used to great effect, and can often play a significant part in the enhancement of dramatic scenes such as this one. Gradually the tension between the Proctors escalates and soon they are arguing, this is bought about when Elizabeth says â€Å"You came so late I thought you'd gone to Salem this afternoon† to John. We know from the stage directions, which direct the actor's body language that John realises Elizabeth is implying that he went to see Abigail. Miller portrays the tension between them by using exceptionally short sentences that help to show the coldness and curtness that they show towards each other. In this act John and Elizabeth have several blazing arguments and between each argument there is a lull, it becomes apparent that all the personal disagreements and grudges within the town are coming to a head. Like in a crucible, which is a melting pot everything is being brought to the surface and is breaking down, society is collapsing within the town and amongst the town's people. Because Miller builds up several arguments between John and Elizabeth, he prevents this scene from becoming boring and keeps the sense of tension between John and Elizabeth very much alive. Whenever the audience begin to believe that the Proctors have resolved their problems another argument breaks out, this stopping and starting prevents the audience becoming frustrated with the constant squabbling and makes sure the sense of tension and conflict is maintained. The series of smaller outbursts between them then conclude into a huge argument in which Elizabeth says to John † She (Abigail) has an arrow in you yet, John Proctor, and you know it†, this is true, despite the fact that Abigail is in Salem and far away from the Proctors she is still causing arguments between them and is driving a wedge between them. Elizabeth knows that John is still physically attracted to Abigail and that she has a hold on him. She creates a strong sense of conflict because John hates Elizabeth's accusations and resents her for continuing to bring up the past when he simply wants to be forgiven and allowed to have a fresh start and be a good husband to her. It is excruciating to watch this scene between the Proctors and see jealousy, suspicion and mistrust tearing them apart however the tension and conflict created is so strong that the audience feels compelled to watch on. When Hale interrupts the Proctors argument and invades their privacy the sense of conflict between the Proctors eases and the tone of the play and atmosphere changes. John and Elizabeth realise that they must work together to eradicate any suspicions or accusations of them being witches, this causes great tension because it is very hard for them to join forces and act as though nothing between them had happened. Following a huge argument they must help each other and keep up appearances. This is a very subtle and clever way of creating tension. Throughout Act two in the crucible Miller creates a sense of conflict and tension between the Proctors using a number of different methods. Doing this I believe is a brilliant way of keeping the audience interested and making the ending of the book more dramatic. Not only however does this in particular scene help to ensure that the audience wish to watch on, but it also ensures that they understand key events in the play, such as Elizabeth's denial of Johns affair. In act two the audience discover that Elizabeth does know about Johns affair so therefore can work out the later on in the play Elizabeth says that John did not have an affair to protect him, not because she simply did not know. I think that were it not for this scene then the whole of the story would be a lot more complicated and harder to understand. So in conclusion although the tension and sense of conflict that Miller creates between the Proctors make Act two an interesting scene, it also affects the rest of the play and the audiences understanding of events to come as a whole.

Essay on Plato on the Existence of Negative Forms

Plato on the Existence of Negative Forms The question of the origin and nature of evil in the world has preoccupied philosophers throughout history. The ancient philosopher Plato does not directly address this question in his writings, but it can be argued that the logic of his theory of forms demands the existence of forms that are negative in meaning, such as the evil and the bad. When discussing his theory of imitation, Plato alludes to the principle that whenever there are many things of the same nature, there is one form for that nature. In several passages, Plato makes mention of many negative things. It can be debated, however, whether or not the negative has a positive ontological character of its own for†¦show more content†¦He writes: Now, the god either because he didn?t want to or because it was not necessary for him to do so, didn?t make more than one bed in nature, but only one, the very one that is the being of a bed. Two or more of these have not been made by the god and never will be. Why is that? Because, if he made only two, then again one would come to light whose form they in turn would both possess, and that would be the one that is the being of a bed and not the other two.[2] Plato is saying that there is only one form for the many because there is a single nature that is recognized as unifying each of the many. It is this nature that imitates the form and since the nature is one, there can only be one form. There are several points in the Republic where Plato alludes to many instances of a negative quality, so it can be argued that, according to Plato?s system, there must be one negative form. For the purpose of analyzing Aristotle?s criticism of Plato, David Ross outlines three distinct respects in which a term can be considered negative.[3] The first category of negative terms that Ross identifies are those which are ?purely negative in their meaning? such as the ?not-good? or ?not-beautiful.? What the many not-good have in common is the absence of being good. The second class of negative terms in Ross?s division encompasses terms that are positive in the sense that they express a qualityShow MoreRelatedPlatos View Of The Worldview Of Plato966 Words   |  4 PagesWorldview of Plato Plato showed more interest in the success of society as a whole as he suggested that not revealing the wisdom or truth to others is a disservice to society. Plato showed more interest in everyday material objects than the average man, he looked towards material objects having a transcendental aspect. This is what made Plato such an interesting philosopher. Not only was he able to look at the world in a more unique way, which showed that Plato was truly a loving person. He wasRead MoreComparing Aristotle and Plato Essays1325 Words   |  6 PagesComparing Aristotle and Plato Aristotle argues that in order for a polis to emerge, a union between man and women must convene. Later a household must be introduced which unites with other households to form a village, villages come together to form city-states. This theory is Aristotle’s natural view that an individual can not be self sufficient Plato argues that, in order to achieve absolute justice, a city-state is needed. In The Republic, Plato builds around the idea of Philosopher RulersRead MorePhaedo by Plato1189 Words   |  5 PagesContestants of this perspective on knowledge are called empiricists. People who practice this form of thinking conceive that knowledge is produced from sensory experiences. Empiricist see the importance of sensory experiences in order to provide answers about the natural world. Each view has their benefits and drawbacks but each play a vital role in the discussion about knowledge. The philosopher Plato is considered to be a rationalist thinker. In Plato’s Phaedo, he shows the reader that the fiveRead MoreThe Republicn and a Brief History of Philosphy1763 Words   |  7 Pagesphilosopher-king, soul, and truth. Plato uses justice though as the folk point and the remaining five trace back to justice. Socrates defines justice as â€Å"that one man should practice one thing only, the thing to which his nature was best adapted† (Plato 123). Socrates then goes to discuss the three parts to the soul, â€Å"A man reasons, we may call the rational principle of the soul, the other†¦ may be termed the irrational or appetitive† and then there is the spirit (Plato 130). Kant proposes that justiceRead MorePhilosophy Is The Idea Of Knowing One s Mind By Asking The Simplest Question1494 Words   |  6 Pageswisdom, which originated in Ancient Greece around 2500 BCE. In philosophy, people undertake a journey to discovering and understanding the fun damental truths about; themselves, the world, and relationships both personal and public. Philosophers like Plato believed that our ideas influence the way we live, and therefore offered a simple yet practical approach to wisdom. As over time, philosophers have sought answers to life’s imperative questions: what is right and wrong? what is the meaning and purposeRead MoreRhetoric : The Power Of Discourse1689 Words   |  7 PagesThe Power of Discourse The art of rhetoric has been present since the beginning of time. The birth of rhetoric is usually attributed to the Greeks as they presented us with ideas and theories about discourse. Famous philosophers such as Plato, the Sophists, and Aristotle presented us with theories that continue to be studied throughout. Most importantly the reason why we still study rhetoric is because rhetoric is everywhere. Our everyday lives are filled with the intensity of rhetoric and whatRead MoreSt. Augustine as the True Heir of Plato Essay1144 Words   |  5 PagesAristotle and St. Augustine have both been influenced by Plato. Their philosophy on morality, politics, and the purpose of life has been platonically influenced. St. Augustine is the true heir of Plato because he has taken Plato’s ideal state, and revealed the implications of the lives that the citizens of the earthly city lead, in the City of God. Plato’s state is an ideal state, that would not function in reality. St. Au gustine has taken Plato’s notions, and have furthered the implications of livingRead MorePersonal Philosophy : Al Farabi1684 Words   |  7 PagesAristotle, Plato, and Socrates were the main Greek influencers of Al Farabi. Al Farabi as well as Ibn Sina have been recognized as Peripatetics or rationalists. The best known Arabic source for Al Farabi s political philosophy is his work titled The Virtuous City. In many of Al Farabi’s philosophical works the practical use of philosophy is a major concern, and while the majority of his philosophy has been influenced by Aristotelian ethics, his practical philosophy is more closely related to Plato. Plato’sRead MoreThe Complicated Life of Socrates1183 Words   |  5 Pageson expressing his beliefs. He wasn’t the typical â€Å"teacher† or â€Å"preacher†; he was a very critical and analytical thinker that helped guide his students and the Athenians during his time. Through his teachings and beliefs, Socrates had positive and negative influence on the people during his time and modern time. Although he is credited as one of the founders of Western Philosophy, Political Philosophy, and Ethics, his teachings was in disagreement with the teachings of the democracy of Athens, whichRead MoreHistory of Philosophy1337 Words   |  6 Pagesunique way. Starting with Aristotle who was born in 384 B.C. and developed his views in Greece during a time where polytheism was standard and Christianity did not exist. Aristotle believed in eternity and an afterlife much like most Greeks as well as Plato, his teacher. Descartes, a 17th century philosopher originally from France, had views of the world and life that quite possibly were influenced by his experience as soldier and a thirst for proof of everything he had ever been told. He distrusted