Check your notes; below is a succinct synopsis of that introductory discussion: “Waiting for Conventions” In Waiting for Godot, Beckett implements broken conventions of traditional theatre in order to successfully satirize the detrimental nature of the human condition symbolized throughout this absurdist play (which seems to have no plot). A certain level of tension is created by this plays lack of plot which leaves the audience expecting something to happen that never comes. This lack of plot to some overshadows the reasoning behind why Beckett does this. Although these broken conventions can act as a looking glass into the true meaning of the play, they require the audience to do a certain amount of searching to crack the nut which is Waiting for Godot. Waiting for Godot, unlike many plays follows no specific plot, a concept in which most conventional plays ought to have in order to rope in an audience member to the contents and morals of the play.
Andrew Wolff IB English Mrs. Singer Act 3 Commentary Hamlet’s soliloquy in Act 3, the “To Be or Not To Be,” portrays Hamlet as a very confused man. He is very unsure of himself and his thoughts often shift between two extremes. In the monologue, he contemplates whether or not he should continue to live, or if he should end his own life. Also, he considers seeking revenge for his father’s death. However, unlike Hamlet’s first two major soliloquies, this one seems to be governed by reason and not frenzied emotion.
Here Hamlet enters with a dilemma: “To be or not to be”. Hamlet outlines a long list of the miseries, and asks who would choose to bear those miseries if he could choose to die. Hamlet goes on to describe miseries, specifically his disgust at his mother’s marriage. He thinks for a while that death may end all the troubles of life. But then he is unsure o the consequences of death.
Shakespeare Rosencrantz and Guildenstern The Irony of Life and Death Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead by Tom Stoppard is a play spun off of Shakespeare’s Hamlet. In the play Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, the two men chosen to escort Hamlet to England, are the main focuses. In the play the two feed off of each other, Rosencrantz a coin flipping carefree follow, and Guildenstern, one who questions each situation they encounter make for an unforgettable pair. Within the play Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are driven by the fear of their own death and isolation than they are by the interest in, or sympathy with, others. In the beginning of the play the two friends are walking down the street simply flipping coins when they encounter a Player and his band, The Tragedian’s.
And can the public acquire synthetic knowledge from a play? I will be answering these questions in my exploration of the epistemic crisis in Othello. The play is put on trial; the crime is of insufficient and questionable knowledge. By extension, it is the failure in the act of belief to cultivate into knowledge. Knowledge is therefore caricatured by the act of belief in the dialogue between the characters in this play.
King lear by the phenomenal Shakespeare showcases how quickly a person can wither away when they are not able to come to terms with life. In the novel, we watch the main character King Lear struggle with reasoning, fear and agony, nothingness, which ultimately lead him to his undoing. Existentialism states that human reasoning is weak and imperfect, and that there are dark places in human life which are “ non reason” and to which reason scarcely penetrates. We see this concept in the novel King Lear, when Lear demands that his daughter compete for the inheritance of land by articulating their love and loyalness towards him. His daughter Goneril is the first to speak and uses big fancy words such as, “ Sir, I love you more than word can wield the matter”( 1,1,60).
His scene is crucial to the play as it hints at Claudius’s indiscretion and Hamlet’s first outward rejection of Ophelia. It provides an insight to Hamlet’s struggles with life. The themes of the play of questions and mortality are prevalent in this scene. Shakespeare also uses the scene to characterize Hamlet, Claudius and Ophelia. The character of Claudius has been developed in this scene.
However, Hamlet is pensive ad extremum, at times even brooding; he constantly overuses his intellect while ignoring his emotions and ignoring what "feels right." His extreme logic causes him to delay his revenge against Claudius until the final scene of the play where he kills Claudius and proves that he has progressed into a truly existential character. At the beginning of the play, Hamlet acts out of pure intellect and processed logic. He suppresses his natural instincts, his emotions, and trusts only in the power of his intelligence. For instance, when Hamlet encounters his
However, Hamlet is pensive ad extremum, at times even brooding; he constantly overuses his intellect while ignoring his emotions and ignoring what "feels right." His extreme logic causes him to delay his revenge against Claudius until the final scene of the play where he kills Claudius and proves that he has progressed into a truly existential character. At the beginning of the play, Hamlet acts out of pure intellect and processed logic. He suppresses his natural instincts, his emotions, and trusts only in the power of his intelligence. For
Shakespeare’s Hamlet has and intricate plot formed by the characters and themes throughout it. One major idea is Hamlet’s changing sanity, which fluctuates through the play as a performance and as a true madness. The other main theme which develops the play is the act of vengeance, with the delay and doubt that accompanies it. These themes, along with dramatic devices and the characters in the plot, add to the textual integrity of the play. There is a duality to the character of Hamlet, as his madness changes from a performance to true insanity throughout the play.