"Hamlet"- overall reflections and questions

Reflections:

I enjoyed reading this play, although it was a challenge to read at the beginning, I slowly got better at it. However, I didn't enjoy it just because it got easier to understand. I enjoyed reading it because of how much was going on and thus how many different interpretations could be taken and discussed. I liked how we weren't assigned anyone we "had to like" because almost all of the characters were flawed that you could make your opinions of them and they didn't  have to change because the author says so (although the opinon's of many characters often still didchange because of new actions/information). For example, Hamlet can be disliked by many people because he kills people and is cruel to people, or he can be pitied because his sense of obligation and desire to do well by his father drives him to these actions, or he slowly grows on people as the play goes on because he is slowly revealed to be a very moral person who is stuck in a hard position (having to kill his uncle to avenge his ghost father that keeps reminding him of his task) while acting/being insane. 

Questions: 

Why poison all the swords? In their planning, Laretes and Claudius makes it seem like will only be Laretes' blade that positioned. Is it Laretes' guilt that makes him decide to poison all of them?

Why was it so important that Ophelia be buried in "Christian" ground? Why were victims of suicide not given this privilege? 

Is Hamlet, or any other character, able to be considered a tragic hero? 

"Hamlet"- the end (Act V post)

In this blog post I will be discussing the final lines of the play with Fortinbras and Horatio. 

In the final lines of the play, Horatio suggests that he explain what happened to result in 4 deaths at one party in the form of a play. This proposition and then the following preparations made me wonder at what the rest of the play was: was it Horatio's play or was it a more "truthful" play because Horatio hadn't been in every scene, but just heard about the scenes he wasn't in from other people. This second play recounting the same story as the play I was about to finish reading reminded me of many of the conversations we had in class about what is "real" and what is not while we were reading The Things They Carried. I think that Horatio's proposed play within a play, along with other ironic allusions to acting and stages throughout the play, and with the inclusion and focus on madness (something which can be caused by a difficulty at determining what is real and what is not) that Shakespeare was trying to challenge the idea that people immerse themselves in entertainment/literature and make it "real" when in it isn't truly "real", only a story being told by a group of people who take on the personas of fictitious (even if they were potentially based upon actual people) characters in order to tell it.

"Hamlet"- Gertrude and the Ghost

Why can Gertrude not see or hear the Ghost in Act 3 Scene 4?

One possible answer to this question could be that only those who have the desire for revenge can see the ghost. Gertrude has no desire for revenge, or at least revenge through violence, so she cannot see/hear the cause of her son's insanity (desire for revenge caused by the Ghost's story, thus the Ghost is the cause of Hamlet's madness). However, if this is the reason why Gertrude cannot see/hear the Ghost, then what drives the guards to want revenge? Perhaps the guards can see the Ghost because they will be involved in Hamlet's revenge or they are lying in wait for Fortinbras' army of revenge to come attack them.

Another, simpler, explanation could be that the Ghost can choose who is able to see him. He could have chosen not to reveal himself to Gertrude in order to keep her from going into any further shock, or to keep Hamlet's persona of a madman alive in order to ensure that he will get his revenge (thus helping the Ghost), or a combination of the two, or for some other inexplicable reason.

"Hamlet"- Challenges

In this post I will be discussing how reading Hamlet has been different for me than reading other Shakespeare plays.

Shakespeare is one of my favorite authors, so I'm really excited that we are reading Hamlet. Overall, I am enjoying the play so far, but this play is much more challenging than any play I have ever read before. In the past with Shakespeare, I can read it normally like a book and pick up what it is saying (or look up a few things in the side notes).  However, so far with Hamlet, I have had some trouble understanding what is going on and have had to look at the notes frequently for guidance on what the characters are saying. I think that this challenge comes from several places. First, I haven't read Shakespeare for English class in two years (we read Macbeth sophomore year), but I have read several plays for fun in the years between, as well as for my Independent Study in Theatre this year (A Midsummer Night's Dream), which sort of negates this reason. Secondly, and I think more accurately, that Hamlet is a more complex play with respect to underlying meaning/themes than many of the others that I have read, and thus the language needs to be more complex to reflect that. I think that, as we discussed in class, that Hamlet focuses much more on the psychological (which results in more difficult readability in contemporary English) than on action. To overcome this challenge, I will read more closely and possible check things that I am still very confused on with No Fear Shakespeare (although I typically don't like their translations, but it might help clear some plot confusion up).