The destructive suction of a black hole not only perilous, but inescapable once matter becomes close enough. Similarly, in William Shakespeare’s Hamlet and George Orwell’s 1984, the protagonists are seduced by their ids, the source of a person’s desires and impulses, to indulge themselves in attaining their deepest aspirations. Although the superegos, the contraction to the id, of Hamlet and Winston warn them not to succumb to their instincts they overlook the precautions and view their superegos as hindrances to their ids. Hamlet and Winston, while breaking societal rules to satisfy their ids, attempt to hide behind their egos, the reality principle, in order to avoid the consequences of their misdeeds. Eventually the ids of the protagonists overcome their superegos, thus influencing them to commit crimes previously thought to be absurd. When Hamlet and Winston allow their ids to dominate their superegos they are treated as criminals, ultimately instigating their downfall. Through the protagonists’ misfortune in satisfying their temptations, both Hamlet and 1984 illustrate the dangers of straying from societal standards by indulging the id.
Both stories commence with the protagonists possessing very perceptive superegos, which hinder them from making rash, instinct-driven decisions. In Shakespeare’s Hamlet, Hamlet is introduced as an insightful, philosophical man who believes his discerning superego is an obstacle rather than a virtue, stating that by having “one part wisdom”, he is “three parts coward” (IV iv 41; IV iv 42). Winston, on the other hand, believes that “in moments of crisis one is never fighting against an external enemy but always against one’s own body” when his superego precludes him from committing treasonous c...
... middle of paper ...
...ecome alienated by society and punished severely for diverging from the status quo.
Shakespeare’s Hamlet and Orwell’s 1984 are excellent examples of cautious tales warning about acting against society under the influence of the id alone. In both novels, the protagonists stray from societal standards by following the impulses of their ids without inhibition from their superego. Although Hamlet and Winston attempt to stay within societal rules, their ids eventually overpower any sense of reality they have, causing them to act on their deepest desires without care for the potential consequences. To illuminate the dangers of diverging from the societal status quo, Hamlet and Winston are dehumanized by the societies they rebelled against. Perhaps it is better to remain miserable doing something unenjoyable, but accepted by society, than to act on controversial actions.
In “1984,” Orwell portrays Winston’s secret struggle to undermine the totalitarian rule of Big Brother and the Party in Oceania. The different government agencies, such as the Thought Police and Ministry of Love, exercise unrestricted totalitarian rule over people. Winston actively seeks to join the rebellion and acquire the freedoms undermined by the Party. On the other hand, Heinlein’s brief narrative, “The Long Watch,” depicts a contrasting struggle championed by Dahlquist against the power hungry Colonel Towers and the Patrol. In his struggle to prevent the total domination of the world by the Patrol, Dahlquist chooses to sacrifice his life. Le Guin’s “The Ones who walk away from Omelas,” illustrates a communal form of injustice tolerated for the benefit of the entire city but necessitating the inhumane imprisonment of a child. He portrays the ambiguity of human morality and the individual struggle to determine right from wrong. The authors address social change and power in different ways, reflective of their individual perceptions. Hence, in each narrative, the author illustrates the individual’s role in effecting social change and the conditions under which such change becomes possible.
...es of individuals can be used to explore a broader social wrong, in this case the injustice of a totalitarian government. Both authors use their protagonists to depict how a dictatorial state can destroy all sense of individuality, Orwell by presenting Winston in his fight against “The Party” and Niccol by depicting Vincent in his battle against society. Both authors also use individuals, who must isolate themselves in order to survive to expose how an unjust authoritative government can manufacture isolation. Orwell and Niccol also present conflicting views on the possibility of individual rebellion in an oppressive society, reflected by the success of Vincent and failure of Winston. In their prophetic dystopian texts both George Orwell and Andrew Niccol use the experiences of their protagonists to explore the broad social wrong of a totalitarian government.
Heroes in literature and history, more often than not, meet tragic ends, unless they were created by Walt Disney. These particular people are often seen as someone who is apart from the masses in morals and attempt to accomplish a higher calling for the common good. The problem with this type of hero is that they are destined for suffering.Two such characters exist in classic literature, Winston Smith of George Orwell’s 1984 and Hamlet of William Shakespeare’s “Hamlet, Prince of Denmark.” Hamlet is the true classic tragic hero, though, because he is of noble birth, possesses high moral standards, completes the task he is given to better the world, and causes tragedy in both his life and the lives of others.
Conformity is an entity that occurs in the lives of the ordinary; an infinite precedent and inner machination of the enigma people call human nature. Consensus from hordes of people and authority influence independent thoughts, actions, and consciousness, a fundamental social mistake that consequently leads to stripped individuality and ultimately orthodoxy. In William Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar, all plebeians’ voices are spoken as one and are universal. The plebeians display no debate or disagreement and are easily moved by the speeches of Brutus and Antony. In George Orwell’s 1984, the proletarians are all content; they have no need to rebel. Winston, the protagonist, is desperate to guard the ‘spirit of humanity’ while withholding his will to seek truth, yet he falters and joins the majority that will continue to maintain class hierarchy. Both, works delve into the instinct of human beings and the power of social pressures, showing that many will adopt views and beliefs even without realization, ultimately giving up one’s own individuality and free thinking. The fickle love of the plebeians in William Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar and the ignorance of the proletarians in George Orwell’s 1984 portray conformity through the majority’s natural instinct to follow authority.
Hamlet: Hamlet's Sanity & nbsp; & nbsp; “Great wits are sure to madness near allied, and thin partitions do. their bounds divide.” Though John Dryden's quote was not made in regard to William Shakespeare's Hamlet, it relates very well to the argument of whether or not Hamlet went insane. When a character such as Hamlet is under scrutiny, it can sometimes be difficult to determine what state he is in at. particular moments in the play.
Identity, in today’s society, is often taken for granted. We have the ability to be anything we wish to be and act in any way we wish to act, but in the 1984 novel by George Orwell, identity is not taken for granted because it does not exist at all. Winston Smith, the narrator, lives in a dystopian society based on the idea of totalitarian government rule. This government is known as Big Brother. In order for Big Brother to stay in power, a few things are necessary: identity cannot exist; everything and everyone must be uniform; the past must be controlled in order to regulate the present; and the people must constantly be practicing the ideas of Newspeak and Doublethink, a form of control the government holds over the people.
George Orwell creates a dark, depressing and pessimistic world where the government has full control over the masses in the novel 1984. The protagonist, Winston, is low-level Party member who has grown to resent the society that he lives in. Orwell portrays him as a individual that begins to lose his sanity due to the constrictions of society. There are only two possible outcomes, either he becomes more effectively assimilated or he brings about the change he desires. Winston starts a journey towards his own self-destruction. His first defiant act is the diary where he writes “DOWN WITH BIG BROTHER.” But he goes further by having an affair with Julia, another party member, renting a room over Mr. Carrington’s antique shop where Winston conducts this affair with Julia, and by following O’Brien who claims to have connections with the Brotherhood, the anti-Party movement led my Emmanuel Goldstein. Winston and Julia are both eventually arrested by the Thought Police when Mr. Carrington turns out to be a undercover officer. They both eventually betray each other when O’Brien conducts torture upon them at the Ministry of Love. Orwell conveys the limitations of the individual when it comes to doing something monumental like overthrowing the established hierarchy which is seen through the futility of Winston Smith’s actions that end with his failure instead of the end of Big Brother. Winston’s goal of liberating himself turns out to be hopeless when the people he trusted end up betraying him and how he was arbitrarily manipulated. It can be perceived that Winston was in fact concerned more about his own sanity and physical well-being because he gives into Big Brother after he is tortured and becomes content to live in the society he hated so much. Winston witnesses the weakness within the prole community because of their inability to understand the Party’s workings but he himself embodies weakness by sabotaging himself by associating with all the wrong people and by simply falling into the arms of Big Brother. Orwell created a world where there is no use but to assimilate from Winston’s perspective making his struggle utterly hopeless.
In 1984, George Orwell presents an overly controlled society that is run by Big Brother. The protagonist, Winston, attempts to “stay human” in the face of a dehumanizing, totalitarian regime. Big Brother possesses so much control over these people that even the most natural thoughts such as love and sex are considered taboo and are punishable. Big Brother has taken this society and turned each individual against one another. Parents distrust their own offspring, husband and wife turn on one another, and some people turn on their own selves entirely. The people of Oceania become brainwashed by Big Brother. Punishment for any uprising rebellions is punishable harshly.
In the novel 1984, Orwell produced a social critique on totalitarianism and a future dystopia that made the world pause and think about our past, present and future. When reading this novel we all must take the time to think of the possibility that Orwell's world could come to pass. Orwell presents the concepts of power, marginalization, and resistance through physical, psychological, sexual and political control of the people of Oceania. The reader experiences the emotional ride through the eyes of Winston Smith, who was born into the oppressive life under the rule of Ingsoc. Readers are encouraged through Winston to adopt a negative opinion on the idea of communist rule and the inherent dangers of totalitarianism. The psychological manipulation and physical control are explored through Winston's journey, and with Winston's resistance and ultimate downfall, the reader is able to fully appreciate O'Briens reasoning, "Power is not a means, it is an end."
In the beginning, Orwell shows that Winston’s id takes over when he first decides to write in a journal. During his rush of rebellion, Winston’s id unconsciously forces him to write “Down with Big Brother” in his diary. Winston’s suppressed id drives him to act upon his ultimate thought and desire without filtering them through the ego and super ego. Winston’s id for an instant makes him believe that he is outsmarting the Party, however once he realizes what he as done Winston’s ill developed superego begins to kick in and he quickly becomes overwhelmed by the idea that he will be caught. In a Freudian perspective, Winston’s continuous anxiety of getting caught stimulates the id which then further influences him to rebel against Big Brother.
Authors often use their works as a way to express their own opinions and ideologies. However, it is the skill of the author that determines whether these ideas are combined with the plot seamlessly, making a creative transition of ideas from the author’s mind, to the reader’s. There is no doubt that George Orwell is a masterful writer, and one of his most popular works, 1984, clearly expresses his negative views of the Totalitarian government. A common theme in the dystopian society in 1984 is betrayal: The Party is very intolerant towards any form of disloyalty, and anyone who plots against them or Big Brother will eventually either betray their own mind and accept Big Brother as their leader, or be betrayed and revealed to The Party by one of their so-called comrades. Overall, Orwell is using this constant theme of betrayal to show how alone and alienated the protagonist (Winston Smith) is in his quest against Totalitarianism, thus showing how flawed and hopeless the political system is.
Shakespeare’s play Hamlet is a complex and ambiguous public exploration of key human experiences surrounding the aspects of revenge, betrayal and corruption. The Elizabethan play is focused centrally on the ghost’s reoccurring appearance as a symbol of death and disruption to the chain of being in the state of Denmark. The imagery of death and uncertainty has a direct impact on Hamlet’s state of mind as he struggles to search for the truth on his quest for revenge as he switches between his two incompatible values of his Christian codes of honour and humanist beliefs which come into direct conflict. The deterioration of the diseased state is aligned with his detached relationship with all women as a result of Gertrude’s betrayal to King Hamlet which makes Hamlet question his very existence and the need to restore the natural order of kings. Hamlet has endured the test of time as it still identifies with a modern audience through the dramatized issues concerning every human’s critical self and is a representation of their own experience of the bewildering human condition, as Hamlet struggles to pursuit justice as a result of an unwise desire for revenge.
An individual’s response to conditions of internal and external conflict is explored throughout literature. In his play, Hamlet, Shakespeare delves into the themes of appearance versus reality, lies versus deceit, rejection versus self doubt and tragedy, and in doing so attacks the frivolous state of humanity in contemporary society. In order to explore these themes, however, he uses several forms of conflict to project his opinions and expand his ideas relating to the themes of the play. Internal conflict, as well as external conflict are dominant features of his works, and in Hamlet are made evident through a succession of dire events which can attack and destroy someone. However perhaps the most captivating form of conflict Shakespeare uses to expand and explore the ideas presented within the text is the conflict between the self and the universe.
Hamlet is one of the most often-performed and studied plays in the English language. The story might have been merely a melodramatic play about murder and revenge, butWilliam Shakespeare imbued his drama with a sensitivity and reflectivity that still fascinates audiences four hundred years after it was first performed. Hamlet is no ordinary young man, raging at the death of his father and the hasty marriage of his mother and his uncle. Hamlet is cursed with an introspective nature; he cannot decide whether to turn his anger outward or in on himself. The audience sees a young man who would be happiest back at his university, contemplating remote philosophical matters of life and death. Instead, Hamlet is forced to engage death on a visceral level, as an unwelcome and unfathomable figure in his life. He cannot ignore thoughts of death, nor can he grieve and get on with his life, as most people do. He is a melancholy man, and he can see only darkness in his future—if, indeed, he is to have a future at all. Throughout the play, and particularly in his two most famous soliloquies, Hamlet struggles with the competing compulsions to avenge his father’s death or to embrace his own. Hamlet is a man caught in a moral dilemma, and his inability to reach a resolution condemns himself and nearly everyone close to him.
In writing Hamlet, William Shakespeare plumbed the depths of the mind of the protagonist, Prince Hamlet, to such an extent that this play can rightfully be considered a psychological drama.