Hamlets Delay

Hamlets Delay

By: Amber Copp

In the play Hamlet one of the main themes is revenge. Not only does it underlie almost every scene, but it also has a major effect on the story as a whole. The main revenge plot was Hamlet's aim to avenge his father by killing his uncle and king Claudius. This played a major role in presenting to the audience the theme of revenge.  Though the main question everyone was asking is why Hamlet didn’t sweep to revenge his father. In Act 1, scene 5 Hamlet meets the ghost of his father and after talking to him Hamlet gave us the impression he was going to revenge his father right way. But he didn’t and many people over the years have studied this play making theories on why he did this. A German writer by the name of Goethe came up with the theory that Hamlet had a pure moral nature but lacked the nerve that makes a hero.       

            In the theory it states that Hamlet wasn’t a strong enough person to act out the revenge required to him. In Act 2, scene2 of the play Hamlet says “But in a fiction, in a dream of passion, Could force his soul so to his whole conceit.” Here Hamlets comes out and says he himself doesn’t think he is strong enough to avenge his father. Hamlet portrays himself as a child like character. He acted immature at this mother’s second wedding. Even though his father did just die and she was remarrying so quickly, most thirty year olds would not behave in the same matter hamlet did. This might contribute to the fact that he was not strong enough person because many child’s need to grow up in order to find their inner strengths. Also in the theory Goethe proposed that Hamlet had a pure moral nature which would explain why even when he had an opportunity he did not take action because it wasn’t “the right time”. In act 3, scene 3 Hamlet sees the king at praying, he gets a golden opportunity to avenge his father`s death. But he thinks that if he kills the murderer at his prayer, his soul would go to heaven, and abstain from action. He thus misses a golden opportunity because he does not want a wicked soul to enjoy the pleasure of heaven. So he wishes for some other occasion when the king is indulging in some evil deed to take action. This proves that Hamlets morals were more important than revenging his father.

            You could argue that Hamlet did not kill the king at that particular time because he cared about the king going to hell and he believed in his religion more than the fact that he was not strong enough to do so. In some of the other theories it talks about Hamlet delaying the revenge because of external obstacles but that does not explain why he didn’t kill the king in the chapel, there was no one and nothing there to stop him. Some also talk about the fact that Hamlet was meditated when he ought to have acted, but this does not explain his child like acts. So the theory made my Goethe was primary the best suitable one for Hamlet.

            There are many possible theories for why Hamlet delayed the revenge on his father, but if you take into consideration Hamlets acts and personality it was obvious that he was not a strong enough individual to complete such a tremendous task. You have to set aside what you believe is the right thing to do and find and strength in yourself to do something like this and Hamlet may have not had it in him. Therefore Hamlet lacked to nerve to become a hero because he let his pure moral nature take the best of him.

Bibliography
Quintessence of Dust-2004 Kenneth Chan. 
       http://homepage.mac.com/sapphirestudios/qod/excerpt.html

Hamlet Speech- Act 1 Scene 5

https://mail.google.com/mail/?shva=1#inbox/12d5f23b2e5ff1bb

R#3

Ideologies	Similarities	Differences
Luddism	-Self interests, the government was not making any of the decisions -Rights and freedoms- they wanted the right to work. They were fighting because they lost their jobs to machines and they were trying to get their jobs back by destroying the machines.	-they were having a violent revolution -they were destroying the private property
Chartism	-Individual rights and freedoms, they were wanting the right to vote	-They were going against economic equality by wanting everything to be equal for everyone no matter how hard another man worked
Utopian Socialist	-Individual rights, individuals could realize their potential if they were free to pursue their own inclinations.	-They didn’t believe in self interest and economic freedom there ideologies were more socialist
Marxism	-Competition, between the proletariat and bourgeoisie  -Economic Freedom through a free market economy	-Did not believe in private property -Believed the society would eventually become socialist
Classical Conservatism	-Economic Freedom, if people choose to work hard they benefited themselves	-Did not believe in self interest -But society held responsible for the well being of other which is a collective responsibility
Welfare Capitalism	-Self interest -Economic equality, government limited working hours and had a minimum wages, and a safety net with features like pensions and medical insurance	-promoted collective interest
Welfare State	-Economic equality, free market economy (supply and demand)	-Government had involvement in the economy -People in society did not work themselves the worked for the benefit of each other -everyone had equal opportunities

Response To Hamlet

To Be a Murderer

By: Amber Copp

I did not want to be this

A murderer was not the plan I had

But what else could I do

I’m in a room full of traitors

My uncle or father you could say

He is sitting right next to my mother

A fine woman she is

But how could she be so blind to be with a man

Who is my father’s brother

Only a fool could be so blind

Revenge! I must fulfill my father’s will

That despicable man can’t be king

This poison and rot must go

But yet with all this will power I must be able

But I can’t, but I must, but will I?

To be or not to be that is still yet the question

R#1

Thinkers	Beliefs	How their idea’s were radical at the time	How their idea’s relate to classical liberalism
Hobbes	-people are inherently selfish -need a leviathan to ensure order and security -ruler must be accountable -people have the right to exercise reason	-people never had the opportunity to think for themselves this was new for many people	-self interest -individual rights and freedoms
Locke	-social contract -government should be directly accountable to the people -power should rest within the people	-Monarchs didn’t like the idea of not being in full control	-private property -individual rights
Montesquieu	-equality of individuals -accountability  of government -separation of power -government has 3 branches of power-executive, legislative, and judicial	-called for elimination of the 3 estates structures of French society	-economic quality
Mill	-protection of individual rights and freedoms and the promotion of individual decision making of the core societal institutions	He used his idea’s to critic the people in higher power like the government	-economic freedom -individual rights and freedoms
Ricardo	-prices should not correspond to the value to the product itself -economy should be left up to the free market	Believed that the government/ monarchs shouldn’t be tampering with the taxes and the economic money.	-economic freedom -competition
Smith	-increased the wealth of the state but not the wealth of the majority of the people within the state -work for their owns self interest in a free market system -supply and demand -laissez-faire	The idea that the state would benefit more than the people	-self interest
Dickens	-individuals had the right to work and fend for themselves -was against child labor -wanted to get rid of the poor, middle, and rich classes	-people believed status was everything and his idea’s were shocking to many people	-economic freedom -individual rights and freedoms -self interest

R#2

Philosophers	Idea’s	How they relate and Promote Classical Liberalism
Adam Smith	-Individuals work for their own self interest in a free market system -Free market would lead to a stronger economy and would therefore benefit most people in society -Laissez-faire capitalism, the economic system associated with classical liberalism	Free Market Economy Self Interest Economic Freedom
Milton Freidman	-Idea’s based on Adam Smith’s -Freedom of people to make their own decisions so long as they do not prevent anybody else from doing the something constant liberalism	Self Interest Economic Freedom Individual Rights and Freedoms
John Keynes	-Market system driven by supply and demand -No government interference -Individuals should be responsible for their own finical situation	Individual Rights and Freedoms Economic Freedoms

Critical Response to “The Grapes of Wrath”

In the novel “The Grapes of Wrath” the author John Steinbeck illustrates how characters are faced with competing demands of their own needs and those of society.  It is a natural human characteristics to think of yourself before others but sometimes without even thinking we do things out of the blue to help out family or people in need. You can’t go through life without doing at least one good deed it is in human nature to do so. Steinbeck shows this through many different characters some of which include Tom Joad, Ma Joad and Rose of Sharon.

We first meet Tom Joad at the beginning of the novel. Tom was traveling home from just being in prison. Our first thought about Tom was that he can’t be that great of a guy if he just got out of jail for murder. As we learn a little more about him we find out that he didn’t mean to murder that man but it was out of self defence and we lighten up to Tom a little bit more. Tom’s character grows allot through the whole novel. He has to change who he is in order to help other people survive. When Tom makes it home and see’s that him family is in need of help he brings up the idea of going to California. From what we can tell Tom was never had a big role in the household but now was having to step up in order to get his family moving. Tom’s biggest turning point was near the end of the novel when Jim Casey had died. With so much going on around Tom felt that it was his calling to finish what his friend started. With so many families dyeing and starving around him Tom changed into a preacher like man and went on his way to try to spread the word of peace and try to make a difference in everyone’s life who was struggling to get into California, struggling to survive. As the peoples demand from peace of mind increased Tom’s self preservation changed to the demand of the people around him.

During the years of depression the woman’s role in the house hold was not very important in the sense that they did everything in response to what their husbands did. Ma Joad had to step up and become the head of the house hold when her husband started losing faith and becoming lost within himself. Usually the man stays strong for his family but in this case Ma had to stay strong in order to keep her family together.  Everyone kept looking to her for stability and Ma stepped up to the plate and was there for her family. This was not typical for this time in history but it is a natural instinct for a mother to protect her family when it is needed.

Rose of Sharon’s character changed dramatically in such a short time. Throughout the novel with interrupted her and a typical 16 year old girl. She was extremely self observed and really only thought of herself. She acted like a spoiled brat and didn’t really appreciate all the hard work her family was doing. At the end of the book her character did take a giant step forward. When there was a little boy’s father in need of some nourishment Rose of Sharon unselfishly did the unthinkable and gave the man some of her own milk. It was her motherly instincts and this act saved this man. It was a good deed and it was unexpectedly act coming from the one character we didn’t expect would do something so courageous.

People change in order to help the people around them in times of distress. In most case’s peoples self preservation’s change in order to adapt to the demands of a society or even a family. Steinbeck’s character’s changed/ grew when their instincts told them to. The author did this to show the fact that humans can’t help but do the right thing in times of need. No matter what kind of person you are you know in your heart that we all have to give a little in order to survive.