An Analytical Essay on the Significance of the Players in Hamlet
The significance of the players exceeds the sole purpose of entertainment, as each possesses the power to unveil the "occulted guilt" (3.2.75) and conscience of the King. Hamlet assumes the responsibility to advise these players with precise and adequate direction so that a "whirlwind of passion" (6) may not effectively separate Claudius from personally identifying with the play. Hamlet's enthusiastic approach toward direction may be so that he encourages the players to "suit the action to the word, the word to the/ action, with this special observance, that you o'erstep not/ the modesty of nature" (16-18). However, this exercise of caution may justify Hamlet's too often delayed attempt toward the action of avenging his father's murder. His direction confines him to the overflow of words as he experiences imprisonment within the truth of his own identity.
Hamlet grants himself the opportunity to momentarily direct himself, yet it remains unknown as to whether he directs a representation of truth or a falsity. He exemplifies madness so well, as the sight of "a damned ghost" (77) insanely induces his imagination and comfortably transforms his identity to one of lunacy. This role he acquires is one he portrays so explicitly well as an actor that he easily utilizes it as the foundation for his players. He instructs the players:
Nor do not saw the air too much with your hand,
Thus, but use all gently, for in the very torrent, tempest,
And, as I may say, whirlwind of passion, you must acquire
And beget a temperance that may give it smoothness. (4-7)
Abstinence from overly dramatizing the actions of the play may be reflective of Hamlet's character prior to his escape from true self: a once-lived life of normalcy focused more wholly on "smoothness" (7) rather than an uncontrolled "torrent, tempest, / ...whirlwind of passion" (5-6).
Hamlet's direction of the players claims victory as Claudius abruptly arises and exclaims, "Give me some light. Away" (254)! Horatio's observation of the King's reaction confirms his guilt-inflamed conscience as he was forced to witness the reenactment of his brother's murder. Hamlet, relieved, reveals, "I'll take the ghost's word for a thousand/ pound" (271-272). The ghost is officially trustworthy as the King's reaction encourages Hamlet to journey further toward his mission of avenging the death of his father.
She thought that she had a horrible life when really she was a strong woman with a lucky life and a loving husband. Towards the end of the story it says, “Madame Loisel looked old now. She had become the sort of strong woman, hard, and coarse, that one finds in poor families”(Maupassant 300). Loisel was, again very poor from the ten years of trying to pay off her necklace debts, but not only is ten years older, she looks much older than that from the constant working. At the end of the story, she runs into the woman whom she borrowed the necklace from, and the woman says this, “Oh, my poor, poor Mathilde! Mine was false, it was only worth five hundred Francs at the most”(Maupassant 301)! Loisel, after all the hard working her and her husband did finds out the the necklace was false and worth thousands less than what she had payed off. At the end of “The Necklace” Madame Loisel is much older from the ten years of aging work, and realized that the hard life she thought she had before. She did not actually have until now, but all the hardships made her a stronger and tougher woman than
Hamlet is extremely proud of Old King and respects him.“He was a great human being. He was perfect in everything. I’ll never see the likes of him again” (I.ii.185-188). Hamlet loves his father and gives the greatest praise at the funeral. Grief driven by love tempts Hamlet to think his father’s goodness, and more, the loss of such a favorable figure. Hamlet believes that the ghost that is said to look like the dead king is indeed his father.”He waxes desperate with imagination”(I.ii.92). The Prince, who is deep in sadness and does not think sufficiently, is convinced that the spirit is the Old Hamlet, he is the only person that can physically communicate with the ghost. Hamlet for the second time talks to the apparition in his mother’s chamber, where Gertrude does not see any. What Horatio and other witnesses encounter at the gate at night proves the possibility of the existence of the ghost, Hamlet later in the play is considered to be truly mad on the account of his unusual ability to see and talk to the spirit, which is obviously conjured up by his mind. Rising actions in both the book and the play are implied at the beginning of the stories: Amir’s memory of 1975 and Old Hamlet’s death. The journey of redemption or revenge takes actions of concealing their true emotions and implementing devised
The Iliad is not only a narrative of epic battles and armies, but also of the redemption of a man ruled by wrath. Achilles, whose wrath is the driving force of the whole tale, experiences redemptive changes in the following ways .Firstly by being able to experience empathy, secondly by being willing to forgive those who his wrath was kindled against ,and finally by being able to release the sinister emotions that ruled his life. Achilles does not experience a total redemption in a biblical sense, but instead experiences partial redemption of his character. The Iliad is a novel of a humanistic redemption that does not fully grasp the Christian sense of the word but is nevertheless still redemption.
and Mme. Loisel cooperate to find what seems to be an exact replica of the lost necklace, which they must purchase and return to Mme. Forestier. Mathilde attempts to find a replacement for the necklace to prevent Mme. Forestier from realizing the original had been lost. The couple travelled “from one jeweler to another hunting for a similar necklace” (175). They went together to look for the necklace, which proves that they are exerting mutual effort. M. Loisel uses all means necessary to pay for the necklace. He “made ruinous deals” (187) and “risked his signature” (188) in order to pay for the expensive diamond necklace. Though Mme. Loisel lost the necklace, her husband uses his savings and takes out loans to help her pay for the replacement. The couple acquires the necklace and must return it to Mme. Forestier. M. Loisel brings the necklace home, and “Mme. Loisel took the necklace back” (199) to the owner. The couple collaborates to get the necklace into the hands of its owner. Mathilde and M. Loisel work together to replace Mme. Forestier’s necklace, and she is none the
Kate Chopin wrote for a reason and with a sense of passion and desire. She lived the way she wanted to and wrote what she felt, thought, and wanted to say. Kate wrote for many years and her popularity was extreme until critical disapproval of her novel, The Awakening, a story that portrayed women’s desires of independence and control of their own sexuality. Most men condemned this story, while women applauded her for it. Kate wrote with a sense of realism and naturalism and she created a voice that is unique and unmatched. The voice gave a view of the female role in society and contributed to the beginning of the later feminist movements. In 1915, Fred Lewis Pattee wrote, "some of Chopin's work is equal to the best that has been produced in France or even in America. She displayed what may be described as a native aptitude for narration amounting almost to genius" (qtd. in Amazon.com “About the Author”). Kate Chopin was a 19th century American author who cared about women and their rights. She was a bold writer who had a huge impact on how the world should treat women.
Most characters in Hamlet present themselves as something other than themselves or how as we, the audience, or another character thinks they should appear. Two of the main characters in this play, Hamlet and King Claudius, are constantly acting as something other than their true nature. Ironically, the characters that invoke changes in Hamlet and King Claudius to reveal their real personalities are the players, merely actors themselves, not showing true emotion: (in this short analysis, I will attempt to display the truth revealed by the players) they agitate King Claudius and allow Hamlet to see their appearance as more accurate to the truth than the appearance of "real life characters," therefore triggering him to take action. Despite their fraudulent feelings, the players play a key role in showing the audience, not to mention Hamlet and King Claudius themselves, their true emotions on a tragic situation.
The plays the thing wherein I'll catch the conscience of the King". (55) Towards the end of the play, Claudius hastily removes himself from the crowd, verifying Hamlet's suspicions. Now, Hamlet not only possesses every reason to believe the ghost, but entrusts his faith in the ghost as well. However, Hamlet's faith does not lie solely in the ghost. He has another kind of faith faith in himself. Hamlet's belief that he can see through his revenge blatantly exemplifies his faith in himself.
... his father’s ghost, and whether or not to get revenge. Hamlet is still unsure about the ghost being real or a hallucination from him going mad. This also adds suspicion about Claudius's true motives in marrying Gertrude and his concern for his country of Denmark. Shakespeare opts to let Hamlets character possesses these certain characteristics so early on so that it will set the scene for the rest of the play. I predict Hamlet will become so delirious and mad; he will listen to what the ghost tells him. He only wants the best for his country, but there about to go to war with Norway under the direction of a king who in Hamlets eyes is not worthy. I believe there will be a power struggle between Hamlet and Claudius over the throne and for Hamlet to claim what is rightfully his.
One of the most compelling topics The Iliad raises is that of the intricate affiliations between fate, man and the gods. Many events related by Homer in his epic poem exhibit how these three connections interweave and eventually determine the very lives of the men and women involved in the war. Homer leaves these complex relationships slightly unclear throughout the epic, never spelling out the exact bonds connecting men's fate to the gods and what can be considered the power of fate. The motivation for the ambiguousness present in The Iliad is not easily understood, but it is a question that enriches and helps weave an even greater significance of the results into Homer's masterpiece. I feel that the interaction between man, god, and fate can be shown to be one great fluidity that ultimately leaves life mysterious, giving much more depth and complexity to the bonds between the three.
Knowing how she feels he surprises her with a ticket to the ball. He gives her his savings in order for her to buy a new gown. Though he was unable to get her any jewels he suggests her to tell her rich friend to let her borrow a necklaces in order to see his wife happy. On the contrary, the husband from "The Jewel" does not fully satisfy his wife in the way that she wanted. He dreads going out to the opera while his wife loves it. He was also unable to buy her luxurious jewels so she pleases herself with false jewels and ornaments. Though both men adore and love their wife, one tries harder than the other, even though neither one can afford paying the objects the ladies truly desire.
For years, people have contemplated the influence of divine power, environment, or genetics, as determining how free any individual is in making their choices. The ancient Greeks personified this force into the Fates, who shape and determine the lives of mortals. In Homer The Iliad translated by E.V. Rieu almost every mortal in the poem is faced with the paradox of having a predetermined life, and having the freedom to make their own choices. It is important to recognize that the gods don't control fate; though there are times when they consider acting against it. While immortals play their role in fulfilling fate, a character such as Achilles is faced with an option to live a long life away from warfare, or live a short life of glory. Being
Ten years of suffering is the cost of having pleasure for only one night! In “The Necklace,” by Guy de Maupassant presents Mathilde Loisel, an attractive, charming but vacuous and selfish middle class lady transforms to selfness, poor, satisfied and hard-working lady. Even though, Mathidle owns a comfortable home and married to a faithful and kind husband, Monsieur Loisel, who seeks her happiness and satisfaction; she was ungrateful to the things that she had been given, because her greed and desire of wealth had captured her thoughts and blurred the real meaning of happiness in her perspective. Mathidle spends most of her time surfing in her day dreams of being wealthy and suffering from accepting the reality, because her imagination was more than she could not afford. One day Mathidle’s husband brought his wife an invitation for a fancy party, but as a result of their low income, Mathidle’s was ashamed to wear flowers as decoration, so she decided to borrow an expensive looking necklace from a friend of her, Madame Forestier. After attending the fabulous party and spending a memorable great time looking stunningly beautiful, Mathidle discovers that she had lost the expensive necklace that she borrowed, so she decides to buy a similar copy of the necklace to her friend after loaning an enormous amount of money and narrowing the house outcome. The author surprises his readers with a perfectly detailed twist at the end of the story. Losing the necklace was a turning point in Mathidle’s life and the best thing that ever happened to her.
In “The Necklace,” Mathilde’s internal struggle is with herself. She mentally battled with the physical and financial limitations placed on her, but more with her own soul. She was unhappy with her place in life and could not accept the simplicity of her station, believing it to be truly beneath her. “All those things… tortured her and made her angry. “ Her husband’s blatant acceptance of their place only fueled her frustrations further.
“The Necklace”, narrated by Guy de Maupassant in 3rd person omniscient, focuses the story around Mathilde Loisel who is middle class, and her dreams of fame and fortune. The story is set in 19th century France. One day, Mathilde’s husband brings home an invitation to a fancy ball for Mathilde; to his surprise Mathilde throws a fit because she doesn’t have a dress or jewelry to wear to the ball. M. Loisel gets her the beautifully expensive dress she desires and Mathilde borrows a diamond necklace from Mme. Forestier, a rich acquaintance of Mathilde. Mathilde goes to the ball and has a night she’s dreamed of, until she gets home from the ball at 4 A.M. to find
The night of the ball came and Mathilde looked great; everyone admired her. The evening ended and everyone went home. Mathilde decided that she would look at herself in the mirror one last time before getting out of the clothes. When she did, she noticed the necklace that she admired so much was gone. Mathilde and her husband had to borrow thirty-six thousand francs from people they knew to buy another just like it so they could return it to the friend. Mathilde and her husband were deeply in debt. For ten years they worked day in and day out until finally the debt was paid off.