Analysis Of Hamlet's'soliloquy '

856 Words2 Pages

In his famous “To be or not to be” soliloquy, Hamlet contemplates death and existence. To him, death is full of unknowns and existence is full of suffering and pain. Eventually, he decides to endure “the heart-ache and the thousand natural shocks/that flesh is heir to…” (Shakespeare 62-3) rather than face the possible horrors that might be revealed in death. Kumin’s “In the Park” agrees with Hamlet in the aspect that death and the afterlife is mysterious. Through the exploration of Buddhist and Jewish beliefs on death and the near death experience of Roscoe Black with a grizzly bear in Glacier Park, Kumin comes to a conclusion that death is inevitable and non-discriminatory. Her nonchalant acceptance of death contrasts with Hamlet’s fear of death. The attitude of both poems towards life further sets them apart. Hamlet is tormented and intimidated by the suffering and pains of existence while Kumin subtly appreciates the complexity of life and the possibilities it offers.
Hamlet acknowledges his own cowardice in lines 83-8: “Thus conscience does make cowards of us all,/.../And enterprises …show more content…

Hamlet’s soliloquy is written in blank verse. Most of the lines have ten syllables and follow the iambic pentameter. The disciplined thinking of Hamlet is seen in the rigidity of the structure. On the other hand, “In the Park” has such an informal, conversational tone that there almost seems to be no structure. Kumin writes in free verse. Each line does not have a certain number of syllables nor does it follow any stress pattern. “In the Park” also jumps from topic to topic in the each stanza while Hamlet’s soliloquy follows a logical train of progression. The relaxed structure of “In the Park” represents Kumin’s certainty and comfortability with her beliefs and thoughts while Hamlet’s distant tone and rigid structure can be seen as a mechanism he uses to retain some control in discussing a confusing and difficult

Open Document