Writers of the seventeenth century had varied approaches to the relationship between reason and emotion. Most writers included the use of both reason and emotion throughout their works, but emphasized the dominance of either reason or emotion. In Shakespeare’s King Lear, for example, many characters that become dominated by emotional needs make poor decisions, while characters with rational stances tend to thrive based upon their wise decisions. Robert Herrick’s poem, “To the Virgins, to make much of Time,” is another work that focuses on the dominance of rational actions and decisions over emotional needs. The dominance of reason as the essential method of making decisions becomes apparent in the works of both Shakespeare and Herrick. Some writers emphasized emotion as the dominant factor in regards to what should influence an individual’s decision the most. For instance, in John Donne’s Poem, “The Flea,” the speaker attempts to convince his lover through the use of rational thought, however, his intention of emotional ‘satisfaction’ is obviously his primary goal. Donne emphasizes the need for emotional satisfaction as being more important than the need for reasonable thought, however, Donne’s rational approach demonstrates his intermingling of both reason and emotion into one work. Other writers emphasize the importance of both emotion and reason. For example, in Thomas Hobbes’ work, Leviathan, Hobbes evaluates the equal importance between both emotion and reason in regards to human nature. Hobbes realizes that men are motivated by many desires including happiness, an emotional need, and power, a rational need, and thus evaluates the significance of both when observing human nature. Writers of the seventeenth century addressed b...
... middle of paper ...
...ignificantly and strove to maintain that balance. Some writers did favor reason over emotion in their works, however, they still addressed the emotional approach within their work. In Shakespeare’s King Lear and Robert Herrick’s “To the Virgins, to make much of Time”, for example both favored the rational approach and associated reason with success. However, both of these works directly corresponded to the emotional appeal as well. “The Flea” was a poem that focused largely on the emotional appeal, yet it still maintained a rational approach as well, through the speaker’s convincing of his companion to engage with the speaker. Thomas Hobbes acknowledged both emotion and reason, in his book, Leviathan. The authors of the seventeenth century regarded the relationship between reason and emotion delicately as they believed that each approach to writing was significant.
Hamlet is a masterpiece not because it conforms to a set of conventions but because it takes those conventions and transmutes them into the pure gold of vital, relevant meaning. Hamlet’s feigned madness, for instance, becomes the touchstone for an illumination of the mysterious nature of sanity itself (44-45).
Riddled with ambiguity by its very nature, the text of William Shakespeare's Hamlet has been a commonly debated subject in literary circles since its first performance. The character Hamlet undergoes intense physical and emotional hardship in his quest for revenge against his despicable uncle. This hardship, some argue, leads to an emotional breakdown and, ultimately, Hamlet's insanity. While this assessment may be suitable in some cases, it falls short in others. Since Hamlet is a play, the ultimate motivation of each of the characters borrows not only from the text, but also from the motivations of the actors playing the parts. In most respects, these motivations are more apt at discerning the emotional condition of a character than their dialogue ever could. Thus, the question is derived: In Kenneth Branagh's film adaptation of Hamlet, does the character Hamlet suffer from insanity? Giving halt to the response, this paper will first endeavor to establish what insanity is and will then provide sufficient examples both from the text, film, and Branagh's own musings on his motivations as proof that Hamlet's character, at least in Branagh's version of the play, is not insane.
Emotions are a vital part of what makes human’s separate from the rest of the animal world. They run how a person thinks, acts, and processes information. In Shakespeare’s play Much Ado About Nothing, the characters let their emotions get the best of them and this causes much conflict to arise in the play. The friar, being the only character to stay coolheaded helps to develop the plot of the play with the marriages as well as to aid the theme that using emotions to problem solve leads to disaster whereas using logic causes desirable results.
The theme of reason versus emotion can be found by analyzing individual character’s actions in William Shakespeare’s Othello. However, the line between to the two decision-making mindsets is not always very apparent. Three characters – Iago, Desdemona, and Othello – will be analyzed to show that Shakespeare wanted to blur the line between reason and emotion and demonstrate that individuals do not necessarily operate with only one or the other.
Human nature is a conglomerate perception which is the dominant liable expressed in the short story of “A Tell-Tale Heart”. Directly related, Edgar Allan Poe displays the ramifications of guilt and how it can consume oneself, as well as disclosing the nature of human defense mechanisms, all the while continuing on with displaying the labyrinth of passion and fears of humans which make a blind appearance throughout the story. A guilty conscience of one’s self is a pertinent facet of human nature that Edgar Allan Poe continually stresses throughout the story. The emotion that causes a person to choose right from wrong, good over bad is guilt, which consequently is one of the most ethically moral and methodically powerful emotion known to human nature. Throughout the story, Edgar Allan Poe displays the narrator to be rather complacent and pompous, however, the narrator establishes what one could define as apprehension and remorse after committing murder of an innocent man. It is to believe that the narrator will never confess but as his heightened senses blur the lines between real and ...
One of the most analyzed plays in existence is the tragedy Hamlet, with its recurring question: "Is Hamlet’s 'antic disposition' feigned or real?" In truth, this question can only be answered by observing the thoughts of the main characters in relation to the cause of Hamlet real or feigned madness. In the tragedy Hamlet, each of the main characters explains Hamlets madness in their own unique way. To discover the cause behind the madness of Hamlet, each character used their own ambitions, emotions and interpretations of past events. Characters tried to explain Hamlet's "antic disposition" by means of association to thwarted ambition, heartbreaking anguish, and denied love. In the workings of their thoughts, the characters inadvertently reveal something about their own desires, emotions and experiences to the reader.
Despite its undeniable greatness, throughout the last four centuries King Lear has left audiences, readers and critics alike emotionally exhausted and mentally unsatisfied by its conclusion. Shakespeare seems to have created a world too cruel and unmerciful to be true to life and too filled with horror and unrelieved suffering to be true to the art of tragedy. These divergent impressions arise from the fact that of all Shakespeare's works, King Lear expresses human existence in its most universal aspect and in its profoundest depths. A psychological analysis of the characters such as Bradley undertook cannot by itself resolve or place in proper perspective all the elements which contribute to these impressions because there is much here beyond the normal scope of psychology and the conscious or unconscious motivations in men.
Literature is often used to convey messages to their audience, through art, play or poetry. Whether it is intentional or not, an author can not help to include some aspect of the political events that happened during that time period. Two movements discussed in this essay are Enlightenment (17th – 18th Century) and Romanticism (18th – 19th Century) and through literature, we come to acknowledge the presence and representation of evil and how they shape society. Enlightenment thinkers value reason, rationality and moderation, whereas Romanticism encouraged imagination, emotion and individual sensibility. Tartuffe by Moliere demonstrates all of the Enlightenment values in his play, whereas Frankenstein by Mary Shelley emphasizes emotion, passion and the natural world. This essay will explore ways in which human reason and society can be evil and deceiving; although some individuals may think that evil is instilled in us from the day we were born.
Mary Shelley assumes that the ideas of reason should be measured with the common sense. She criticizes with this narration the radical rationalism that was evident in the literary pieces of her parents. Shelley’s husband also used the similar ideas in his poems, the so-called Prometheanism of the Romantic Age (Bloom 8).
Levy, Eric. "THE PROBLEMATIC RELATION BETWEEN REASON AND EMOTIONS IN HAMLET." Renascence 53.2 (2001): 83. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Web. 15 Mar. 2010.
Davis, Tenney L. “The Sanity of Hamlet.” The Journal of Philosophy 18.23 (1921): 629–634. JSTOR. Web. 25 Apr. 2014.
One of the most analyzed plays in existence today is the tragedy Hamlet, with its recurring question: "Is Hamlet's 'antic disposition' feigned or real?" This question can only be answered by observing the thoughts of the main characters in relation to the cause of Hamlet's real or feigned madness. In the tragedy Hamlet, each of the main characters explains Hamlets madness in their own unique way. To discover the cause behind the madness of Hamlet, each character used their own ambitions, emotions and interpretations of past events. Initially one of the most accepted causes for Hamlets instability is that of denied love, conjured by the self fulfilling Polonius.
Theater audiences and literary enthusiasts are not spared of Shakespeare’s astonishing ability to capture the human spirit in his play Hamlet. The story of the tormented prince who desires revenge but is unable to take action delves deep into the human mind than plays before it. While some uninformed readers may write off Hamlet’s behavior to poor writing, it is clear that the Oedipus complex is the true driving force of Hamlet’s actions when delaying his revenge.
Christopher Marlowe and Sir Walter Raleigh both create speakers who disagree about the nature of romantic love. The titles of the twin poems, “The Passionate Shepherd to His Love,” by Marlowe, and “The Nymph’s Reply to the Shepherd,” by Raleigh, show that they are two sides of a rhetorical exchange. The poems’ structures are identical; each of the shepherd’s optimistic requests has a corresponding refusal from the nymph. Although the word choice and meters are similar in the two poems, the shepherd uses an optimistic tone while the nymph uses a pessimistic one. While both speakers are addressing the concept of love, their distinct uses of diction and imagery underscore how the shepherd’s optimism conflicts with the nymph’s skepticism.
Through the elements of technique portrayed in this essay, it is clear to see that Shakespeare is able to influence the reader through soliloquies, imagery, and dual understanding. This overall influence being both the communication of a deeper meaning, and a more complex understanding of the events and statements within Hamlet.