Mr. Liconti's ENG4U1 class blog Mr. Liconti's ENG4U Resources

Sunday, March 25, 2007

Discussion 5 - Aspects of Hamlet Act 2

There are 5 choices for this weeks blog, therefore there can only be six students per choice.
Please indicate you choice by reserving it in this week's thread.

Topics:
  1. Show that Hamlet is insane Act 2.
  2. Show that Hamlet is sane in Act 2.
  3. Discuss the parallelism of Hamlet, Laertes and Forinbras by the end of Act 2.
  4. Who has the advantage in the play by the end of Act 2, Hamlet or Claudius?
  5. Explain the significance of Ophelia by the end of Act 2.

26 comments:

C.J. said...

By the end of act two, it is clearly Hamlet who is in the proverbial drivers seat. Hamlet had already foiled the only plan of action that Claudius had intended to take against him- wherein he found out that Guildenstern and Rosencrantz were supposed to be spying on him a' la' orders from Claudius- and began to implement his own. Furthermore, Hamlet continues to create the illusion that he is continually slipping into insanity by alluding to how Polonius should allow his daughter to be free. This action plays right into Hamlet's hands because, only a few lines previous, Polonius avidly states that the reason for Hamlets decent into madness was due to the deprivation of love that he is now (supposedly) receiving from Ophelia. The end of act two further cements the idea that Hamlet is in control. He has come to the realization that, if the scene of his fathers death were to be reenacted the guilty conscious of the murderer would cause him to perhaps not only flinch at the act but ultimately shout an admittance of guilt. Hamlet puts his incredible cunning on display in this Act, wherein every one of his actions is not only a defense from Claudius' schemes, but a counterattack of which Claudius is none-the-wiser.

Jenny E said...

Hamlet is one of the most tragic plays written by William Shakespeare. It captures the soul and the humanity of a man. By then end of Act two of the play, Hamlet is facing too much chaos in his life, but faces the challenges carefully. He does not jump into conclusions. This is what makes him a genius compared to other beings. He is also aware of the fact that he is completely alone and has very minimal or no support from anybody else then himself. Even his own mother Gertrude, does not know who her son truly is as a man. She has no trust or faith in him, and believes what Claudius or other tell about him. Therefore, being not perfectly sure, or confused about who Hamlet is, she sends his childhood friends to spy on him. His childhood friends Rosenstein and Guildenstern tries to talk to Hamlet, but Hamlet outsmarts them, and gets them to admit that they were sent by the king. However, by end of their conversation, Rosenstein and Guildenstern is convinced that Hamlet is also lost his mind. Polonius, the politician, is the main character who supports Claudius to the fullest ability. He firmly believes in Hamlet’s insanity, and will do anything to please Claudius, the Dane. Although the readers are aware of the fact that Hamlet is carefully playing his pieces for his revenge, it is clear that by end of Act two, nobody is on his side. Everybody wants to be favoured by Claudius, the king, and do anything to crush Hamlet. Therefore, by the end of Act two of Hamlet, it is clear that Hamlet does not have any support from anybody, compared to Claudius, who has lines of people on his side.
Queen Gertrude, mother of Hamlet is lost and does not know how to think for herself. She simply lets others think for her, even at the most important topic in her life - her son, her own flesh and blood. She likes to go with the flow. She will never stand up for herself, or strongly states her opinion. It is questionable if she is even able to do so. She has heard lots of negative stories of Hamlet, and instead of talking to him on one on one, she decides to spy on him. What kind of mother would spy on their own child? This raises doubt of Gertrude ability as a mother. She may talk like a Queen, with grace and fashion, but there is no meaning behind her words. She tells Hamlet’s juvenile friends, “Good gentlemen, he hath much talked about you, / And sur I am, two men there is not living/ To whom he more adheres. I fit will please you/ To show us so much gently and goodwill (2.1.19-22).” She starts off by sugar-coating her words like a Queen, but the main idea of her order is go talk to her son, and find out what is going on with him. Claudius has full control of her and she simply lets him do whatever he wished to her.
Hamlet’s childhood friends Rosencrantz, and Guildenstern are sent by the King and the Queen to spy of their own friend. Once again, just like the Queen, it is debatable if Rosencrantz and Guildenstern is or was, a true friend of Hamlet. Or were they just being friendly because of his title as a ‘Prince’? They try to talk to Hamlet, and check is sanity, or rather his insanity. However, Hamlet the mastermind sees right through them. He says, “I know/ the good King and Queen have sent for you” (2.3.280-281), and gets them to admit their reason of visit. By end of their conversation, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern is still convinced that Hamlet has lost his mind, or they wish to believe that he is insane. When they are reporting back to the King, it would be easier for them to simply report back that Hamlet’s sanity is true. It would cause more problems if they told the King that Hamlet is acting. Everybody is dying to please the king, and be on his good side.
Polonius, the real politician would do anything for the better and the good of Denmark, the kingdom. Denmark is his life and passion. He would even give up his own family for the glory of Denmark. All he wants is order and success of the country. He is willing to use his own daughter, Ophelia to prove Hamlet’s insanity. He reports to the King and the Queen, “she took the fruits of my advice, / And he, repelled - a short tale to make -/ Fell into a sadness, thence into a weakness, / Thence to a lightness, and by this declensions, / Into the madness wherein now he raves. (2.2.145-149). He tells the King what exactly he wishes to hear.
Therefore, by examining the Act two of Hamlet, it is clear that Denmark is on Claudius is side. Although it is doubtful if Claudius has the full support he need, but regardless of this, Hamlet is a single man. Hamlet has nobody in his side. The whole nation believes he has lost his mind, and fully believes everything coming out from their new Dane. It is clear that Claudius has more advantage and patronage from the people of Denmark.

Andrew S said...

In Act II it can be argued that Hamlet is quite insane or very much sane. It all depends on how the reader interprets the play. Some may interpret it as “Hamlet is insane he has gone nuts!” others might interpret it as “Hamlet is a genius! This is all staged!” The second interpretation is the clearest. Hamlet is completely sane. Hamlet’s insanity is all just an act, he is very much sane, he is just putting on an act for the King and Queen so that at one point he can call the king out on murdering his father, King Hamlet. When Rosencrantz and Guildenstern enter and begin talking to Hamlet, he still acts insane. This is what makes Hamlet sane, he understands that they are coming on behalf of the King to get information out of him. He realizes that his old friends aren’t just going to pop out of nowhere to come visit him at a time like this also, it’s a set up. So this is why he continues his insane behavior, he does this with everyone, it is very intelligent. He even gets the two to admit that they have been sent by the King. He also shows that he is sane because he understands what is going on with the play and is thinking that if the actor was him he would be doing an even better job. Therefore by the end of act II Hamlet is completely sane, not to the characters but to us, because his insanity is all just an act to condemn the King.

Bata said...

The Tragedy of Hamlet Prince of Denmark contains many themes, most of which are very prominent from the very beginning of the play. One of the most pronounced of these themes that reoccurs throughout the play is that of parallelism. This parallelism is used to reinforce the viewers understanding of a certain subject by reiterating what the main character is dealing with through other characters. Within the play Hamlet, this is successful done through the parallelism of Hamlet, Laertes and Fortinbras.

There are immediate signs of parallelism between Hamlet and Fortinbras when it is announced that both of them have been named after their fathers, who were both kings of their land. King Hamlet of Denmark was challenged to battle by King Fortinbras of Norway and King Fortinbras lost his life. Young Fortinbras becomes angry and wants to seek out young Hamlet for revenge. It is this revenge that sparks a filial obligation for both of them because Hamlet needs to avenge his father as well who was murdered by his uncle. It also comes to light that neither of them is referred to ask Kings when they are being spoken about because they both did not become kings after their fathers; instead their uncles have taken reign of the kingdoms. As Hamlet is first introduced in person, his uncle Claudius is as well. Claudius creates parallelism by putting down both Hamlet and Fortinbras publicly; he makes both of them look foolish. To further this Fortinbras’ uncle puts Fortinbras down in court just as publicly as Claudius does to Hamlet, when he finds out that Fortinbras is planning on attacking Denmark. The most discernable show of parallelism is within the theme of spying. The only reason Fortinbras’ uncle had found out that young Fortinbras was going to attack Denmark was because he was spying: “But better look’d into…” (Act 2, 2, 64). Lateral to this spying is Claudius’ spying on Hamlet because he wants to know why Hamlet had suddenly become crazy. Claudius uses two of Hamlet’s oldest friends, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern to spy on Hamlet, who later admit to Hamlet that they were sent to spy on him: “My lord, we were sent for.” (Act 2, 2, 291).

To further the parallelism of spying, the character Laertes is brought in. Laertes has ventured off to France and his father Polonius, which is again another sign of the father son motif, does not seem to trust him. Polonius sends the messenger Reynaldo to spy on Laertes and report back to him with his findings because he wants to know what kind of person Laertes is when he is not around to witness him in the act: “And let him ply his music.” (Act 2, 1, 72). Additionally, Laertes had to ask permission in public on Claudius’ request if he could go back to France in the first place. Laertes’ only reason to go there is for entertainment and not for studying and yet Claudius permits him to go. On the other hand when Hamlet wishes to go back to university in Wittenberg to study and do the complete opposite of what Laertes wants to do Claudius publicly states that he will not allow him to go: “In going back to school in Wittenberg / It is most retrograde to our desire…” (Act 1, 2, 113 -114). Claudius does this so he can keep and eye on Hamlet.

Therefore, by the end of Act 2 there are several examples of parallelism all reverberating the same thing to further enforce the main character problems. All of which are reoccurring themes throughout the play. Which are shown through the comparison of Hamlet, Laertes and Fortinbras.

Cory K said...

Hamlet has come up with a plan to act insane in an attempt to buy time to create a plan to kill Claudius. Throughout the course of act two, however it seems his act has taken over and has become reality to him. His insanity brings on many attempts by Claudius to try to find the reason for his insanity, but he cannot succeed. Although no one can find out why he is insane the way he looks, acts and speaks in act two clearly shows that hamlet has gone insane.

Hamlets looks in act two show that hamlet is clearly insane. At the begging of act two Hamlet is not shown yet, but is described by Polonius’s daughter Ophelia. Hamlet came to Ophelia when she was sowing and described him to her father as, “pale as his shirt, his knees knocking each other.”(2.1.81) Hamlets pail weak look shows his instability to remain clean and well put together, a clear sign he is going insane. Ophelia also described the look on Hamlets face as he approached her from the doorway. She describes his facial expression as, “piteous in purport/ as if he had been loosed out of hell.”(2.1.82-83) An appearance that looks as if someone has been released from hell is a horrifying look, one on that of the face of an insane person. Finally, she describes to her father how his Hamlets dress is all out of fashion and dirty. She tells her father that, “his doublet all unbrac’d/ no hat upon his head his stockings foul’d/ ungarted and down-gyved to his ankle.”(2.1.78-80) As hamlet enters the room with his shirt unbuttoned, no hat on his head and his stockings at his ankles shows that he cannot even dress himself in a proper manner anymore, showing his instability and insanity. By the way that Ophelia describes Hamlets looks in Act two it shows you that Hamlet is not acting anymore and his insanity has grown.

Not only do Hamlets looks show you he is going insane but also so does the way he acts. Hamlet acts in a very awkward way around Ophelia, grabbing her wrist, pulling her closer to him, and starring at her crazily. Ophelia describes his actions, “He took me by the wrist and held me hard/then goes he to the length of all his arm/… he falls to such a perusal of my face.”(2.1.87-90) If Hamlet were faking his insanity he would not act this way in front of his girlfriend, he would probably let her in on the act, but he does not. As Hamlet leaves Ophelia’s room, he walks out in the most awkward way. Ophelia says that, “He seemed to find his was without his eyes/ for out o’doors he went without their helps,” (2.1.98-99). He walks out of her room without taking his eyes off her and makes it right through the door. Such weird actions show that Hamlet must be insane, because if he were not, why would he be acting like this. Polonius also sees Hamlets insane actions as he goes about the castle. He describes to the King that, “He walks for hours on together/ here in the lobby.”(2.2.160-161) Now what sane person would pace in a lobby for hours on end everyday and not say a word. Hamlets actions speak louder than his words as in act two they show that something is clearly up with him and he is definitely going insane.

Hamlet’s looks and actions during act two have shown his true insanity but his words also add to the overwhelming proof of his insanity. His insanity is seen in his words as he speaks to Polonius about his daughter. He is talking to Polonius and then suddenly unexpectedly he asks, “Have you a daughter?”(2.2.182) This is so bizarre because Hamlet is in love with his daughter, we see here Hamlet is going insane because he cannot even remember who the one he loves father is. As he continues to talk to Polonius, his responses are rude and quite strange. When Polonius asks to take leave from Hamlet, Hamlet responds, “You cannot, sir, take from me anything that I will/ not more willingly part withal,” (2.2.215-216). Hamlets response to Polonius, telling him that he wants him to leave is disrespectful and out of line but Polonius just accepts it because he knows that Hamlet is going insane and what Hamlet says does not matter. Hamlets’ words show something is up with him as it is unusual for a sane person to make such remarks, even if they are pretending.

Hamlet is clearly depicted in act two as an unstable and insane person. He is clearly gone past the stage of faking his insanity to buy time and now has become overwhelmed with insanity. The other characters descriptions of Hamlet in act two have shown that hamlet has lost all his marbles. The way hamlet looks acts and speaks during act two is a clear-cut sign that he has gone insane.

James Y said...

By the end of Act 2 in Hamlet, the reader begins to notice parallelism between Fortinbras, Hamlet, and Lartes. Hamlet’s father has died and as a result, his uncle Claudius has succeeded the throne. He is also being spied on by Rosencrantz and Guildenstern. This situation is parallel to Fortinbras, who like Hamlet, has an uncle succeeding the throne as the result of his father’s death. He too is being spied on. Laertes, like both Hamlet and Fortinbras is being spied on and is also subject to the father- son motif.
In Scene 1 of Act 1, the reader comes to realize that Fortinbras’ Father, the king of Norway was killed by Hamlet’s father, the king of Denmark as told by Horatio. It is here the reader immediately begins to notice the similarities between both Hamlet and Frotinbras and the motif of Fathers and Sons. Horatio then describes to Marcellus the king of Norway’s death “is the main motive of our preparations, the source of this our watch, and the chief head of this post-haste and rummage in the land” (Act 1.1.108-110). Here Horatio tells Marcellus that the king of Norway’s death has resulted in Fortinbras seeking vengeance for his father’s death. In Scene 2 of Act 1, the reader realizes that Fortinbras uncle has now succeeded the throne as the result of his father’s death. Claudius, Hamlet’s uncle who has also succeeded the throne of Hamlet’s dead father reveals to the reader that “To Norway, uncle of young Fortinbras- who impotent and bed rid, scarcely hears of his nephew’s purpose” (Act 1. 2. 28-30). Here we notice how both their situations are parallel to each other’s and how their motives are driven by the same cause, that being the death of their fathers. At the beginning of Scene 2 of Act 2, the reader finds that Fortinbras is being spied on by Voltemand, and messenger from Norway. Fortinbras has now been put under house arrest by his uncle, the king of Norway, the same way Claudius has put Hamlet under house arrest in Scene 2, when he says” for your intent In going back to school in Wittenberg, it is most retrograde to our desire”(Act1. 2 .112-114).
In Scene 5 of Act 1, Hamlet comes face to face with the ghost and comes to realize that it’s really his father. Knowing this, Hamlet says “Haste me to know’t that I with wings as swift as meditation or thoughts of love may sweep to my revenge” (Act 1. 5. 29-31). Here hamlet wants to know who killed his father so he may find him and seek revenge. This is parallel to Fortinbras who is also seeking revenge for his Father’s death. In Scene 2 of Act 2 of the play, the King and Queen send Hamlet’s friends Rosencrantz and Guildenstern to check on hamlet and find out the reason behind his antic disposition. The King asks the two to “gather so much as from occasion you may glean, whether aught to us unknown afflict him thus that open’d less within our remedy”(Act 2. 2. 15-18). Here the reader has once again come across the theme of spying and notice that Hamlet is subjected to spying the same way Fortinbras is subjected to spying later on in Scene 2. Here we also notice that the theme of spying in Hamlet and Fortinbras is also parallel to the theme of spying in Laertes.
In Scene 2 of Act 1, we are introduced to Laertes, Polonius’s son. Here the reader immediately recognizes the father/son motif that both Hamlet and Fotinbras were subject to. By the end of Act 2, Laertes has gone off to school in France. However Polonius, Laertes’s father sends a messenger by the name of Reynaldo to “make inquire of his behavior” (Act 2. 1. 4-5). Here the reader is subject to the theme of spying which is parallel to both Hamlet’s and Fortinbras’ situation and dominate within parallelism throughout Hamlet.
Parallelism is a very dominant aspect within Hamlet, Fortinbras and Laertes. Their situations seem to be similar to one another but do not once intertwine. This will be a recurring motif throughout the play and may also anticipate more similar situations.

Taylor S said...

Shakespeare’s sets up triple parallelism in act one to reveal it by the end of act two. This parallelism is evident through the relationships between Hamlet, Laertes, Fortinbras and their Father’s. The parallelism is shown through seeking revenge, and the act of spying. The complex triple parallelism created by Shakespeare can be thought as a masterpiece and would be unattainable by most authors to write.

Many of Shakespeare’s plays are based on revenge. Hamlet and Fortinbras are bound to revenge that they owe their fathers because of filial obligation. King Hamlet’s ghost tells Hamlet he must get revenge on Claudius for him. “Revenge his foul and most unnatural murder.”(1.5.25) “The serpent that did sting thy father's life/Now wears his crown.”(1.5.39-40)Young Fortinbras wants to revenge his father Fortinbras murder, he is preparing for revenge on the Kingdom of Denmark. “young Fortinbras,/Of unimproved mettle, hot and full,”(1.1.98-99) Hamlet and Fortinbras also show parallelism through being denied permission by there father’s. Hamlet wants to travel back to university in Wittenberg but is denied permission by his new father Claudius. “In going back to school in Wittenberg,/It is most retrograde to our desire:,/And we beseech you, bend you to remain/Here, in the cheer and comfort of our eye,”(1.2.113-116) Fortinbras is also denied permission to carry out his revenge on the Kingdom of Denmark from his new father. “On Fortinbras; which he, in brief, obeys;/Receives rebuke from Norway, and in fine/Makes vow before his uncle never more/To give the assay of arms against your majesty.”(2.2.68-71) Shakespeare creates parallelism between Hamlet and Fortinbras to show that children are obligated to their parents.

Many father’s want to find more out about there sons this is the parallelism that can be found between Hamlet and Laertes. Spying is a very dishonest act, but it is what the fathers of Hamlet and Laertes use to get more information about their son’s. Polonius wants to find out what the true character of Laertes is, so he acquires Reynaldo to do this deed for him. “You shall do marvellous wisely, good Reynaldo,/Before you visit him, to make inquire/Of his behavior.”(2.1.3-5) Claudius also would like to discover what Hamlet is planning, so he uses Rosencrantz and Guildenstern to get this information. “To draw him on to pleasures, and to gather,/So much as from occasion you may glean,”(2.2.15-16) Through the dishonest act of spying Shakespeare creates parallelism between Hamlet and Laertes.

Triple parallelism can be found by the end of act two between Hamlet, Laertes, Fortinbras, and the relationships they have with their Father’s. The parallelism is shown through seeking revenge, and the act of spying. Shakespeare uses parallelism to enforce the themes of his play and show the boundaries his characters are living with.

Fady A said...

Who has the advantage in the play by the end of Act 2, Hamlet or Claudius?

Throughout act 2 it is evident that there is a struggle to have the upper hand in the conflict between Hamlet and Claudius. Each character has their own strengths and advantages. However Hamlet has the upper hand at the end of act two only because, of his knowledge and plan.

In order to have the upper hand, each character must need to know as much as they can of their enemies to be able to predict their next move. Both Claudius and Hamlet know something that neither one knows. Hamlet knows that Claudius killed his father “ O my prophetic soul! My uncle!” (1 5 41). Hamlet is determined to get revenge against Claudius. Claudius does not know that Hamlet has it out for him, and therefore it will be unexpected for Claudius. When Hamlet begins to act insane, Claudius becomes curious as to why hamlet is acting this way. To figure out what is wrong he sends Rosencrantz and Guildenstern to spy on Hamlet. However Hamlet sees through their scheme, “ Anything but to ‘th purpose. You were sent for, and there is a kind of confession in your looks, which your modesties have not craft enough to colour. I know the good King and Queen have sent for you.” (2 2 279- 281) In this situation Hamlet has the upper hand because he knows what Claudius has done to his father, and he also knows that Claudius is curious and is trying to find out what is wrong with Hamlet.

Claudius is beginning to become suspicious of Hamlet. Through Hamlets actions Claudius knows that there is something not right with hamlet. This is evident in to ways, he and Polonius decide to send Ophelia as a trap for Hamlet to find out the truth behind his act. “At such a time I’ll loose my daughter [Ophelia] to him. Be you I behind an arras then, Mark the encounter. If he loves her not, and be not from his reason fall’n thereon …” (2 2 162 – 166). It is evident that there is suspicion and curiosity building, however in act 2, we do not see the result of Ophelia Polonius convinces Claudius that Hamlet is only love struck. Claudius is not worried about Hamlet attempting to do anything because he is still sad about Ophelia. Also Claudius does not have time to watch Hamlets ever move. Claudius is worried about the responsibilities of being king. Norway has just asked to walk through Denmark with their 100 000 men army. Claudius is too distracted to think of and worry about Hamlet. Right know one of the last things running through his mind is that Hamlet knows about what he has done and that he is looking for revenge.

The only advantage that Claudius has is his position as king. As king Claudius has great powers to control the fate of Hamlet. If Claudius becomes suspicious of Hamlets knowledge or somehow finds out that Hamlet is looking for revenge he will be able to falsely accuse Hamlet for anything have Hamlet killed. Also no one will believe anything that Hamlet is saying because of his previous act of being insane. This gives Claudius an advantage however Hamlet has a much greater Advantage.


In conclusion Hamlet has the advantage in the play by the end of the second act for three main reasons. The most important reason is his knowledge of Claudius’ actions against his father. The act he is playing has resulted in Claudius believing that hamlet is love struck, and misses Ophelia. Finally Claudius has bigger problem then to deal with Hamlets love life and problems. He is worried about Norway and Fortenbrah idea. Claudius is distracted and is not expecting anything from Hamlet at this point of the play.

Linh H said...

Show that Hamlet is sane in Act 2.

In William Shakespeare’s Hamlet, Act 2 has a controversial amalgam of events. This act is the first opportunity for the audience to witness Hamlet’s antic disposition and the resulting receptions of the rest of the characters in the play. Through these events the audience must establish whether Hamlet’s actions are justified by his act of antic disposition. Hamlet’s sanity is approved in this act through his wit and perseverance of perspective on Polonius’ actions; his unrelenting grief towards the loss of his father and his intolerance in response to Rosencrantz and Guildenstern; and through his steady attempt to prove Claudius’ shamefulness to his own conscience.

As Polonius, Denmark’s highest-ranking minister, is determined to prove that the “...noble [Hamlet] is mad” (2.2.92) with the “very ecstasy of love” (2.1.102) for his daughter Ophelia he encounters Hamlet. In this discourse a preview of Hamlet’s displeasure for Polonius is uprooted. The conversation is quite comical as Hamlet uses the characteristics of his antic disposition to invert the implication of his comments that are targeted toward Polonius. Hamlet allows variation in his random expressions as he begins by accusing Polonius of being “a fishmonger” (2.2.174) to referring to him as “so honest a man” (2.2.176) then mysteriously advising for Polonius’ daughter “not [to] walk i’th’sun” (2.2.184) whom he claims not to know. With these proclaims Polonius can find no “reason and sanity ... /...[to] be delivered of.” (2.2.210-211) and strictly generalizes Hamlet’s madness unto boyish love for Ophelia. Indeed, Hamlet’s sanity can be extracted from these remarks. In the first title, of a fishmonger, Hamlet is nudging at Polonius’ objectification of Ophelia and the value he has placed on the rewards he will reap from the offering of her hand in marriage. This is a personal criticism of Hamlet except that it is disguised in that it can be interpreted for contrasting reasons. There is a concrete intention in these words, as the audience must assume, without Hamlet providing evidence, that he is aware Polonius’ condemnation in he and Ophelia’s relationship. The abrupt stall in communication seems to have sparked this irritation against Polonius. Hamlet finds an outlet of freedom to express his emotions. Furthermore, Hamlet mentions Polonius’ stereotypical weaknesses as “old men have...faces [that]/ are wrinkled... /...a plentiful lack of wit,” (2.2.197-199) and causes the audience to wonder if these are true recollections of what Hamlet feels about Polonius. In fact Hamlet continues through the remainder of the act by referring back to Polonius’ senile and feeble characteristics, at all times maintaining a similar air in criticism. That is, this persistence depicts Hamlet’s unwavering mindset, a trait that can only be upheld with sanity.

Hamlet is faced by the unexpected arrival of his childhood friends, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, whom have been commanded by Claudius to find an explanation “Of Hamlet’s transformation – “ (2.2.5). With this oath they set the mood of conversation with Hamlet basing on the fact that “the world’s grown honest.” (2.2.237) and to this Hamlet replies in an extremely melancholic tone believing that the result must be that “doomsday [is] near” (2.2.138). The duo is shaken by Hamlet’s responses and concurs with the statement of Hamlet’s predicted madness. This act itself unleashes Hamlet’s previously developed character. The audience is aware from his soliloquy in Act 1 that Hamlet is in a state of immense grief and repulsion to the surrounding society. This occurrence is only an addition to his profound emotions. Moreover, it strengthens the proof of Hamlet’s sanity. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern happen to be stunned by Hamlet’s ranting due to their cynical quality. They have already been convinced that Hamlet’s grief is well into excessiveness. Next, Hamlet automatically questions their purpose in Elsinore. Although these are dear friends to Hamlet, it is quite coincidental that the pair would visit the kingdom during this time of tension. Initially, Hamlet allows Rosencrantz and Guildenstern the opportunity to explain their presence. When the question is consecutively avoided Hamlet finally blurts that he “[knows]/ the good King and Queen [had] sent for [them]” (2.2.280-281) and with this, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are forced to reveal what they have been sent to perform. Hamlet illustrates his ability to act as though he is oblivious to the situation. But it is through an ordinary and sane attitude that Hamlet feels the impatience that any other person would experience in this situation. Hamlet’s reaction and skill used to compel his friends to admit their vow is of a nature that is in tandem with reality.

Lastly, in the final scene of Act 2 the audience can discover Hamlet’s underlying sense of transvaluation. Although Hamlet is informed that he must avenge his father, King Hamlet’s murder, he is determined to guarantee that he has dealt with all the possible variables in the situation. This is the reason for Hamlet’s slow reaction to the circumstance as even he wonders since “a damn’d defeat was made. Am I a coward?” (2.2.566) Compelled by the least amount of impulsiveness Hamlet is bound to prove Claudius’ guilt. Hamlet will not jeopardize his life, hazed by his father’s legacy, unless he is certain in the execution of the plan in its entirety. Hamlet is not going to reject the cruel and injustice of his father’s murder or his passion as “He would drown the stage with tears” (2.2.556) when relating to the talent of an actor. But Hamlet is concerned with his own personal opinion. He advances an additional plan to view the true intent of Claudius to the death of King Hamlet in order to have “proclaim’d [his] malefactions” (2.2.588). The rationale of the destruction of Claudius must settle with Hamlet’s conscience. He will only embark on a war against his uncle if he is fair to himself. Hamlet will not stand for fate, or the boundaries of circumstance. This is ultimately the challenge of humanity. Hamlet is not only able to assess what motivations will influence Claudius to react in a particular way, but he understands his duty to his soul. With that notion, Hamlet portrays terrific control and sanity within his own conscience during this situation in his anticipation to “catch the conscience of the King” (2.2.601).

In closing, Hamlet’s sanity is seen through his use of the usual human activities and his capability of remaining indifferent to certain situations in every scene. In Shakespeare’s Hamlet, Act 2 illustrates how Hamlet defies the assumptions of his fellow characters in the play of his sanity through his quick and smart divergence in speech with Polonius as well as his feelings toward the minister; his method in challenging the vow of his lifelong friends Rosencrantz and Guildenstern and his surprising depression; and his strategic planning in coming to terms with the truth of Claudius’ nature. A final question might pose whether Hamlet will continue this behaviour and whether the upcoming situations he will encounter will wear out his improvisation skills.

Jackie L said...

Act II of William Shakespeare's, Hamlet is occupied by a clear power struggle between the two most powerful characters in the play thus far, Young Hamlet and Claudius. Foundations laid at the beginning of the act suggest the Claudius is n control, yet towards the end it may be argued that is in complete control or functioning in utter chaos. Much is left up to the reader to determine. The complex of whether or not Young Hamlet is insane or sane also comes into play when deciphering who has the upper hand, in this glorified chess match.

At the very beginning of the act Claudius conjures up plan to plate Hamlet's childhood around him, in order to understand why Hamlet is acting the way he is. Claudius says to Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, " That you vouchsafe your rest here in out court some little time, so by your companies to draw him on to pleasures and to gather, so much as from occasion you may glean, whether aught to us unknown afflicts him thus that, open'd, lies within our remedy." (2. 2. 13-18), so then later Claudius will know why Hamlet is acting the way he is so he can later fix the problem. Hamlet acting strangely concerns Claudius mainly because what the King is unaware of can fester and become increasingly dangerous if left unattended by the king. Here the reader can notice that Claudius is expressing certain symptoms of worry and anxiety. The reader can formulate from this that in fact Hamlet is in control, and Claudius is merely trying to track Hamlets clever moves. Worry and anxiety are clear examples of a person seeking power and control, because if the person were to be in control then these feeling would be simply disregarded.

In another example Hamlet shows the audience his level of control. In a feeble attempt by Polonius, who was sent by Claudius, Polonius tries to get Hamlet to admit his madness as a cause to his love for Polonuis' daughter. Seeing threw this translucent plan Hamlet counter-attacks with a witty remark, " For if the sun breed maggots in a dead dog, being a good kissing carrion- Have you a daughter?" (2. 2. 181-182), suggesting that Hamlet, the supposed companion to his daughter Ophelia, deny any knowledge of her existence. This provided the audience with the impression that Hamlet did in fact know all of Claudius' plans and saw right through them. Here Hamlet reveals his true intelligence. He was so witty and sharp as to quickly figure out that Claudius sent Poloinus to find the reason why Hamlet was acting to strangely.

In another failed attempt by Claudius he send Hamlet's childhood friends in order to try and discover the reason why Hamlet is acting so oddly. Hamlet says to his friends, " Let me question more in particular. What have you my good friends, deserved at the hand of Fortune that she sends you to prison hither?"(2. 2. 239-241) insinuating that Hamlet does know of their true intentions. So early in their conversation does Hamlet discover the true nature of their long overdue visit. Such an odd visit Hamlet could only contribute this to a master plan by Claudius. Such a uneducated, pathetic endeavor would easily be discovered by the genius Hamlet.

All throughout the second act Shakespeare does a brilliant job in establishing many different clues suggesting that Hamlet does have the upper hand and is in control of the situation. The final scene provided evidence that Hamlet is fully aware of his actions and Claudius is simple trying to chase after Hamlet. Clearly the power struggle is nothing but a frail attempt by Claudius to try and figure out the nature of Hamlet's madness, when the truth of the matter is that no one except Hamlet himself knows this answer.

Angela S said...

Importance of Ophelia

Indeed, Ophelia is perceived an icon of delicacy and innocence throughout Act 1 and 2 of Hamlet. With this in mind, Ophelia is young, thus childlike and is characterized as being naïve. Ophelia plays the role of being an obedient daughter to Polonius and also the love of Hamlet. Being a representation of delicacy, goodness and naivety, Ophelia demonstrates considerable significance to the play. Accordingly, Ophelia exemplifies importance through implying similar interior traits to the Queen, contributes to Hamlets biased opinion on women- that women are frail and it is through Ophelia that the readers are able to gain insight to Hamlets acts of insanity.

Through the Queen and Ophelia’s actions and personality traits, both women show that they are similar in various ways. Firstly, there is parallelism between the two because likewise to Ophelia, the Queen was able to lay aside her love for Hamlet for another man. The Queen did this by marrying Claudius shortly after her husband’s death and hurting Hamlet. Consequently, this not being a loving act toward her son Hamlet, she is displaying her submissive and influential nature towards Claudius. Similarly, Ophelia shows the same characteristics as she is also submissive and is easily influenced by her father and brother. Ophelia says, “No, my good lord, but as you did command, I did repel his letters and denied His access to me” (2.1.108-110). This exemplifies Ophelia’s submission to her father because just as the Queen had done, she lay aside her love for Hamlet and did as what her father told her to do, which was to end all communications with Hamlet. Thus, this also adds to Hamlet’s pain and grief, as he had also loved Ophelia. Hamlets letter even says, “O dear Ophelia, I am ill at these numbers. I have nor art to reckon my groans. But I love thee best, O most best, believe it. Adieu” (2.2.119-121). This letter in which Hamlet had written to Ophelia shows Hamlet’s love for her and therefore exposing how much pain Ophelia’s actions could instill upon him. Since Hamlet cannot directly and impulsively show his mother how much pain her actions of marrying Claudius has caused him or take out his anger on Claudius and the Queen, he is able to show Ophelia, in Act 2, how much she hurt him. Ophelia says, “He took me by the wrist and held me hard Then goes he to the length of all his arm, And with his other hand thus o’er his brow He falls to such perusal of my face” (2.1.87-90). Upon Hamlet appearing at her room and acting this way, Hamlet exemplifies that he is hurt by Ophelia not responding to her letters and reveals to her his acts of insanity.

Secondly as Ophelia demonstrates that she is an icon of innocence, goodness and delicacy within the play, she strongly contributes to Hamlet’s biased opinion on women- that women are frail. As Ophelia is young, childlike and naïve, Hamlet observes this and is therefore able to make the conclusion that he initially stated, that all women are frail. Hamlet says, “Let her not walk i’th’ sun. Conception is a blessing, but as your daughter may conceive-friend, look to’t” (2.2 184-186). Here, Hamlet implies that Ophelia is naïve and weak by saying that she should not go out in public as there are many men that could harm her. In addition, Ophelia contributes to the idea that all women are frail due to the fact that she unquestionably does as what her father, Polonius, tells her to do. Polonius says, “And then I prescript gave her, that she should lock herself from his resort, Admit no messengers, receive no tokens; Which done, she took the fruits of my advice,” (2.2.142-145). With this in mind, Ophelia appears as being extremely to obedient to her father and is easily influenced by him. Thus, this contributes to Hamlets opinion on women and also displaying the fact that Ophelia is prone to be more submissive and loyal towards her father than to Hamlet. Therefore, Ophelia contributes to Hamlets mentality that all women are frail and hence Hamlet’s mentality, he is likely to treat all women as being frail.

Finally, Ophelia is substantial to the play and especially within Act 2 because it is through Ophelia that the readers are able to gain insight to Hamlet’s acts to insanity and his evolution to insanity. For instance, as Hamlet appears to Ophelia in her room with a disordered appearance, people are able to see Hamlets offstage acts of insanity. Ophelia says, “Lord Hamlet, with his doublet all unbrac’d, No hat upon his head, his stockings foul’d, Ungarter’d and down-gyved to his ankle, Pale as his shirt, his knees knocking each other, And with a look so piteous in purport As if he had been loosed out of hell” (2.1.78-83). As Ophelia tells Polonius about Hamlets insane description, this demonstrates how Hamlet is willing to appear insane to Ophelia. Additionally, since Hamlet appears to only be willing to show Ophelia his acts of insanity, she becomes crucial to the play. Just as she speaks of how Hamlet had expressed his love for her, she describes how Hamlet acts insane. Ophelia says, “He falls to such perusal of my face As’a would draw it. Long stay’d he so. At last, a little shaking of mine arm, And thrice his head thus waving up and down, He rais’d a sigh so piteous and profound” (2.1.90-94). Here, as it is questionable as to why Hamlet is acting this way that the reader sees how Hamlet is acting insane. Therefore, through Ophelia the reader sees Hamlet’s offstage acts of insanity, which is crucial to understanding the plot of the play.

In conclusion, Ophelia innocent and naïve, is significant because she implies similar inner traits to the Queen, contributes to Hamlets mentality of women being frail and is important to gain insight of Hamlet’s acts of insanity. Therefore, understanding Ophelia’s character and thus her speech and actions is crucial to gaining insight within the play.

Robyn Emsley said...

Who has the advantage in the play by the end of Act 2, Hamlet or Claudius?

In Act 2 of William Shakespeare’s play, Hamlet, there is a surreptitious conflict between the protagonist, Hamlet, and his uncle and the now King of Denmark, Claudius. Claudius is not only responsible for the death of his brother and the father of Hamlet, he has married Hamlet’s mother, the Queen of Denmark, taken what is rightfully Hamlet’s throne and has turned Denmark against him- undoubtedly causing Hamlet great misery. Furthermore, there is a consistent power struggle between Claudius and Hamlet- not regarding power over Denmark but power over one another. They are in an unending race to be one step ahead of each other- Claudius, to make Hamlet out to look like a fool and diminish any plans he may have to overthrow his leadership and Hamlet, struggling to avenge his father’s death without committing treason. Evidently, Claudius has the foresight to realize that being in a position with such an advantage over Hamlet, must be taken advantage of. Hamlet, however, has planned a more subtle provocation to gain admittance from Claudius of his deed. Though Claudius may have more power in the hierarchy of the country and although his charm and political skills are admirable, Hamlet is clearly ahead of him by means of his ingeniousness.

In Act 1, Claudius takes his first, discreet stab at Hamlet in front of nearly all of Denmark when he mocks him for mourning the death of his father at his mother’s wedding to Claudius. Claudius slyly persuades the crowds to believe Hamlet should be joyous at the occasion of his mother marrying his uncle and that his father would want him to be harder, stronger and weep less. Claudius destroys any opportunity Hamlet would have ever had to convince Denmark of his father’s murderer by making him out to be immature, foolish and inexperienced: “…but to persever / In obstinate condolement is a course / Of impious stubbornness; ‘tis unmanly grief: / It shows a will most incorrect to heaven, / A heart unfortified, a mind impatient…” (1. 2. 92-96). Hamlet is helpless in retaliating or defending himself in this situation, as he cannot disrespect the King, his mother’s husband.

In Act 2, Ophelia approaches her father with disturbing news of Hamlet’s behaviour- that he had come to her pants-down, in a crazed state. At this, Polonius is convinced that Hamlet’s actions are a direct result of Ophelia ignoring and rejecting him. Polonius goes to the King instantly with his news. He explains that he has ordered his daughter not to speak with the likes of Hamlet and this is the cause of his wild behaviour as of late. Claudius, still unsure, looks for reassurance from Polonius and later, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern. Hamlet, however, cannot be caught off his guard; cannot be deceived for his morality and analytical skill places him two steps ahead of Claudius. Hamlet shows he is in control of his actions and has not truly lost his sanity in his conversation with Polonius. Hamlet uses his wit to confuse and distract Polonius from the matter: “What is the matter, my lord? / Between who? / I mean the matter that you read, my lord. / Slanders, sir; for the satirical rogue says here that old men have grey beards…” (2. 2. 192-196). Further on, Hamlet denies Ophelia’s existence by asking Polonius if he has a daughter. The reader, with full knowledge of Hamlet and Ophelia’s relationship, is shown here that Hamlet can not have the wool pulled over his eyes- Claudius’ attempts are translucent and fleeting when compared to Hamlet’s intelligence.

Further on in Act 2, Claudius devises a plan to ultimately spy on Hamlet, as his behaviour is unnerving and suspicious to Claudius. He uses Hamlet’s childhood friends, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern to try and pry information out of Hamlet to discover what is troubling Hamlet so deeply. Claudius is quick to notice and take action on Hamlet, yet Hamlet is much too clever for this sort of trickery. Hamlet immediately sees through Rosencrantz and Guildenstern’s motives for visiting Elsinore and confronts them about who sent them: “Were you not sent for? Is it your own / inclining? Is it a free visitation? Come, deal justly / with me: come come; nay, speak” (2. 2. 274-276). Hamlet knows his friends all too closely and would not be fooled by such a trivial attempt. Claudius was certain his spies would not fail him, yet in this aspect, Hamlet was ahead of the game, with Claudius far behind.

Act 2 concludes with Hamlet’s most prominent move against Claudius thus far. He plans to have a play performed with a speech meant to evoke certain emotions in the King- the guilt that is inevitably haunting him. It is Hamlet’s belief that if the right chord is struck, Claudius may crack and admit his deed in front of Denmark itself. The plan is discreet but it surpasses Claudius’ attempts to break and spy on Hamlet by miles.

Kimberly S said...

In act 2 of Hamlet, William Shakespeare turns Hamlet the man into an argumentative character. Through out act 2, viewers get to observe the actions of Hamlet and see how his actions have an influence on the other characters around him. From witnessing these measures one has to question if Hamlets actions are justified, given his situation. Hamlets sanity is proven in act 2 by his intelligence and awareness of Polonius’ plans, the prolonged morning over the lose of his father; which gives Claudius an idea of sending his best friends to get the truth out of him.

As the King’s trusted councilor, Polonius is up roared at the fact his daughter has been hanging around with the Prince of Demark and therefore is determined to keep Ophelia away from Hamlet. “No, my good lord, but as you did command, I did repel his letters and denied His access to me” (Act 2.1.108-110). Ophelia listened to her father and ignored all of Hamlets gifts but now Polonius believes this has made him mad, “Mad for they love?” (Act 2.1.85), because of his actions done towards Ophelia and now Polonius must prove to the Queen and King that there son is mad. “I will be brief. Your noble son in mad” (Act 2.2.92). Polonius brings out a love letter written from Hamlet to Ophelia and reads it out loud to the Queen and King. After reading it the King, Claudius is interested in finding out if, this explains Hamlets behavior. Act 2, scene 2 shortly then turns into a humorous act, when Polonius encounters Hamlet and Hamlet characteristics of wit and comedian come out. Hamlet calls Polonius a “fishmonger” (Act 2.2.174) and starts twisting around his questions –“what do you read my lord?” “Words, words, words” “what is the matter, my lord?” “Between who” (Act 2.2.191-194). Here Hamlet proves to be sound of mind by having the wit and sense of humor to be able to taunt and mess with Polonius, while Polonius is trying to prove he is not.

It is far to say that Hamlet has been through a lot over the past few months and from Claudius eyes Hamlet has no need to still be morning the death of his father therefore Claudius now wants to figure out why he is acting the way he is. Claudius decides to “hire” Hamlets best friends and get them to figure out his problem. “To draw him on to pleasures and to gather, So much as from occasion you may glean, whether aught to us unknown afflicts hi thus that, open’d, lies within our remedy” (Act 2.2.15-18). When Hamlet, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern run into one another, Hamlet is too intelligent to be blindsided by his friends “random” visit to the castle and therefore proves once again to be sane. “You were sent for, and there is a kind of confession in your looks, which your modesties have not craft enough to colour. I know the good King and Queen have sent for you” (Act 2.2.278-281).

As a result of Hamlets intelligence he proves to be sane, in numerous accounts that say the opposite of his actions committed through out Act 2.

Stephanie N said...

At the conclusion of Act 2, in William Shakespeare’s, Hamlet, we are acquainted with the character of Ophelia. Through Ophelia’s limited lines, she is presented to us as a young and sweet character. Although, we should not take her innocence as naivety as she may deem a far more complex and self conscious character then her lines allow us to read. Ophelia’s character has proven to be one of the only characters that keep Hamlet from tipping over the verge of insanity and his last link to innocence.

Ophelia’s significance upon Hamlet by the end of Act 2 is quite evident. Even though all the elders that govern both Hamlet and Ophelia perceive the relationship between Hamlet and Ophelia as nothing more then a fling, it is evident that both Hamlet and Ophelia know the meaning of their relationship. Even as Hamlet carries out his plans of antic disposition, he still manages to carryout communications with her. I believe that Hamlet does not do this because of his infatuation with Ophelia, but because of what Ophelia symbolizes to Hamlet. Ophelia is the innocence in this play of death, decay and revenge. Hamlet desperately clings onto Ophelia as his last connection to any possible fragment of innocence as he fulfills his filial obligation in this twisted plot of incestuous affairs and horrendous acts of fratricide.

As Hamlet plays as an actor does, Ophelia signifies Hamlet’s only affiliation with reality. Although Hamlet is still in character when he is around Ophelia he still understands and realizes that Ophelia is his last anchor between the thin line of acting insane and being insane. Yet, Hamlet does not directly admit the power Ophelia holds over Hamlet, his intentions of his actions prove differently. “O Dear Ophelia, I am ill at these numbers. I have not art to / reckon my groans.” (2. 2. 119-120) Ophelia represents one of the last things Hamlet can hold as true in his life, especially when his own mother decided that cohabitation with her late husband’s brother proved more important then the health and sanity of her own son.

Ryan L said...

In William Shakespeare’s Hamlet is a genius who demonstrates his brilliance throughout the play. Hamlet acts as if he was insane to throw off the plot against him from Claudius. In Act two Hamlet is shown to be insane by the way Ophelia describes Hamlet’s actions to her father, Polonius, and when Hamlet twists everything Polonius asks in a way no answer is given.

Ophelia is describing Hamlet to her father in a way that no sane man would have been described. Ophelia describes Hamlet as having is doublet unbuttoned, no hat upon his head, his stockings were dirty, his pants were down around his ankles and his knees were knocking against each other. For this to happen in Hamlet’s time was unheard of. If one was to dress like this society of the time would believe the man or the woman has gone insane. “Ungarter’d and down-gyved to his ankle, / Pale as his shirt, his knees knocking each other,” (2.1.80-81) Ophelia also describes Hamlet as grabbing her by her arm and while at arms length staring at her with careful scrutiny and then as upon leaving her Hamlet walked away from her without breaking eye contact as he stared over his shoulder. “he lets me go, / And with his head over his shoulder turn’d / He seem’d to find his way without his eyes,” (2.1.96-98) Ophelia is confused and scared by the way Hamlet is acting. She is confused as to why he grabs her by the arm and stares at her as if he was studying her.

Polonius believes he will be able to trick Hamlet into getting the truth out of him. However, Polonius underestimates Hamlet and Hamlet sends him in circles with his intellect. “Do you know me, my lord? / Excellent well. You are a fishmonger. / Not I, my lord.” (2.2.173-175) Hamlet acts as if he does not recognize Polonius and pretends to have no recollection of him. Hamlet then talks to Polonius about his daughter and confuses Polonius because just a few moments ago Hamlet was thought to have not known him at all. “… Have you a daughter? / I have, my lord. / Let her not walk i’th’ sun. Conception is a blessing / but as your daughter may conceive – friend, look / to’t.” (2.2.182-186) Polonius is now confused because Hamlet is telling Polonius not to let his daughter outside for fear of conception. Polonius believes that Hamlet is does not know who he is, however, still knows who Ophelia is and still loves her.

Therefore, in retrospection of Act two, Hamlet is seen to be going insane. This is demonstrated by the description given by Ophelia of how he was dressed and how he acted around her. This is also demonstrated by the way Hamlet dealt with Polonius in their conversation. Hamlet did not seem to understand who Polonius is and was deflecting Polonius’s questions. It is understood that Hamlet is slowly slipping into a realm of insanity.

David S said...

Who has the upper hand at the end of Act 2, Hamlet or Claudius?

Throughout the play Hamlet there is constant issues that are being dealt with by many characters in the play. Most of these issues involve the characters that are in the centre of the situation to gain the upper hand on one another and have some sort of edge. With regards to Hamlet and Claudius’ relationship it is very clear that by the end of act 2, Hamlet is the one who has the upper hand and it is clearly apparent through Hamlet’s actions. In act 2 Hamlet is successful in tricking Polonius into believing that Hamlet is going insane because he is in love with Ophelia and, in turn, Polonius going to report this to Claudius who is already confused as to the exact root of Hamlet’s insanity. These reasons that have been outlined are the reason why Hamlet has the advantage.

Throughout act 2 Hamlet’s deceiving actions while acting insane has had many key characters scratching their heads, one of these characters is Polonius, Claudius’ right hand man. During scene 1 Ophelia brings to Polonius’ attention the actions of Hamlet which Ophelia thought of as quite unnerving. Immediately after Ophelia informs Polonius of Hamlet’s unusual actions he automatically assumes that Ophelia had said something to trigger his actions “What, have you given him any hard words of late?” (2.1.107), accusing Ophelia of saying something to have caused this. Ophelia says that she had obeyed her father but Hamlet’s actions had confused Polonius, so Polonius decides to inform Claudius of this once he comes to the conclusion that Hamlet has gone insane due to Ophelia ignoring Hamlet “I did repel his letters and denied His access to me” (2.1.109-110).As mentioned once Ophelia informs her father she had obeyed him, Polonius is convinced “That hath made him mad” (2.1.110). In the next scene Polonius informs Claudius that he believes Hamlet is insane because he is in love with Ophelia, “When I had seen this hot love on the wing- As I perciev’d it…” (2.2.132-133) and Polonius also informs Claudius that he believes that his love is the root of Hamlet’s insanity as he had thought earlier that Ophelia was getting too close to Hamlet. Polonius’ theory that Hamlet is insane because of his relationship with Ophelia helps to give Hamlet the upper hand as it begins to confuse Claudius. Claudius does not have one ironed out theory for the root of Hamlet’s insanity but Polonius’ theory is quite probable and even more so would influence Claudius to believe it, as Polonius is one of Claudius’ closest advisers. These reasons above show that Hamlet has the upper hand at the end of act 2 in the play.

During act 2 Hamlet’s scheme starts coming together and his initial aim of confusing his stepfather begins to take shape. As mentioned Hamlet visits Ophelia and acts very strange around her thus leading Ophelia to alert her father Polonius. Polonius goes before Claudius to discuss his theory that he believes that Hamlet has gone insane due to his love for Ophelia. Claudius at first is intrigued and very curious as to what Polonius believes is wrong with Hamlet as even Claudius does not know “ O speak of that: that do I long to hear.” (2.2.50), this instant curiosity shows who is in control and that person is Hamlet. After Claudius is informed of what has happened to young Fortinbras he is anxious to hear what Polonius’ theory is. As Polonius describes his theory, there are some doubts going through Claudius’ head at this point, but Polonius does Hamlet of favor by saying, “Take this from this if ‘tis be otherwise. Points to his head and shoulder” (2.2.156) which is a bold statement by Polonius. Polonius at that moment, by stating that if his theory is incorrect, Claudius may behead Polonius. Polonius being so sure that he is right has a plan to prove this to Claudius, “You know sometimes he walks four hours together Here in the lobby… At such time I’ll loose my daughter to him.” (2.2.160-162). Polonius is going to tell Ophelia to talk to Hamlet to figure out what is wrong with him while Claudius, Polonius and Gertrude spy on the conversation. Polonius’ theory coupled with Claudius’ own curiosity and uncertainty show that at the end of act 2, Hamlet has both Polonius and Claudius guessing what he is doing and what is going to happen next, thus proving that Hamlet is in fact in control at the end of act 2.

Through the actions of Polonius and his theory that Hamlet is insane because of his love for Ophelia, combined with Claudius’ curiosity and longing to know why Hamlet has all of sudden gone insane, also with Polonius being so sure he is willing to put his own life on the line to show that his certainty is unwavering, shows that Hamlet is most definitely in control at the end of act 2, being successful in confusing both Polonius and most importantly his stepfather Claudius. These reasons state clearly why Hamlet, by the end of act 2, has the advantage over his stepfather and uncle Claudius.

Samantha C said...

Act two is really our first sight of Hamlet “acting” insane. We see it in two distinct events. We fist see it with Hamlet’s encounter with Ophelia, and secondly with his two encounters with Polonius.

The first time Hamlet is insane is his encounter with Ophelia. The audience watches Ophelia tell Polonius about her encounter with Hamlet in her room. Ophelia was all alone, just sewing in her room when Hamlet entered. His shirt was all unbuttoned, his stockings were down around his ankles, his knees were knocking and he was extremely pale. He looked incredibly unkept. Hamlet speaks to Ophelia of “horrors” and holds her at arms length by the wrist. Hamlet gives a sigh when Ophelia tries to free herself, and leaves her room without breaking his eye contact with her, “ He rais’d a sigh so piteous and profound/As it did seem to shatter all his bulk/ And end he’s being. That done, he lets me go/And with his head over his shoulder turn’d/ He seem’d to find his way without his eyes/ for out the doors he went without their helps, /And to the last bended their light on me” (2.1.94-100).Ophelia is supposedly someone he loves, and he acting insane. The audience starts to ask why he doesn’t tell Ophelia about the plan of the antic disposition. Hamlet told his two friends, but no the women he loves.

The second time we see signs of Hamlets anti disposition is when he engages in conversation with Polonius on two separate occasions in Act 2. In the first occasion ,when Hamlet enters the room reading a book, Polonius greets him kindly, while one of the first things that come’s out of Hamlets mouth is an insult to him. Hamlet acts as though he doesn’t know Polonius and talks as if he didn’t know Ophelia. Hamlet goes on to say, “Have you a daughter?/...Let her not walk I’th’ sun. Conception is a blessing,/ but as your daughter may conceive – friend, look/ to’t,” (2.2.182-186). Polonius talks aside to himself, as if the scene had frozen in front of the audience and his thoughts had words. Polonius was witnessing Hamlets madness, although he did find sense in what Hamlet was saying from time to time. In hamlets last encounter with Polonius in Act 2, Hamlet dissent seem to take notice that Polonius is talking to him. Hamlet seems to be carrying on a conversation with himself while Polonius is trying to do his job by introducing the players. Hamlet goes as far to make an allusion between Polonius and Jephthah who sacrificed his daughter for politics. Hamlet made a very good effort to make sure Polonius saw his antic disposition.

In the end, Hamlet has really played up his antic disposition in Act 2. The audience is left questioning Hamlet and his actions. Can Hamlet distinguish between acting and reality? Is Hamlet really acting, or has he actually become insane. The audience will only be able to come their own conclusion at the end of William Shakespeare Hamlet.

Caley M said...

Show that Hamlet is sane in Act 2

In Act two there are many misconceptions about Hamlet and the way he acts. Some say his insanity has taken over him and he truly has become insane others say it’s his love sickness that he has towards Ophelia. But no one has come to terms with the fact that Shakespeare is maybe trying to fool the audience/reader into believing that even though they know his plan of acting insane, how he does it makes them believes he’s insane as well. Everything that Hamlet is doing in Act two to the characters in the play is not an act of insanity but an act of reason. Him showing up to Ophelia’s room, talking to Ophelia’s father Polonius, and confronting Rosencrantz and Guildenstern give Hamlet an image of madness but also an image of brilliance. No one like Hamlet could and would pull it off as good as he does.

Act two scene one ends off with Ophelia telling her father Polonius that Hamlet has gone weird, love sick, and insane. The reason being is because of the incident she witnesses of Hamlets appearance, “My Lord, as I was sewing in my chamber, Lord Hamlet, with his doublet all umbraced, no hate on his head, his stockings fouled…” (2.1.85-87). The audience knows that Hamlets putting on an act and the question that is asked is; why is he doing this to his own girlfriend Ophelia the one that he loves the most and trusts? The reason why Hamlet’s actions are towards Ophelia is because he doesn’t want her to get hurt in the end. It’s better for him to start with her and have her push him away then him have to push her away. This doesn’t mean Hamlet doesn’t love Ophelia you can surely tell he loves her heartedly and this is the reason why he does this so she doesn’t get hurt. She is a source to Polonius and if he has too he will use her to his advantage. Hamlet already knows this so he pulls her away from him to have Claudius believe that he is lovesick. “He took me by the wrist and held me hard. Then goes to the length of all arm, and with his other hand thus o’er his brow he falls to suck perusal of my face as he would draw it…that done, he lets me go…”(2.1.97-106). No eyes are on him knowing about Claudius killing his father, all eyes are on his insanity becoming because of heart break.

Polonius is one of the most curious characters besides Claudius of Hamlets actions of insanity in Act two. Every move of action he hears about Hamlet he will as he is suppose to report it to the king. “Take this from this if this be otherwise: if circumstances lead me, I will find where truth is hid, though it were hid indeed within the center.”(2.2.165-169). Polonius is telling the king and queen that he will find out where the truth is hidden even if it is in the center of the earth. Polonius is convinced more than anything that Hamlets cause of insanity is by his daughter Ophelia, and if he is wrong then he is allowing the king to no longer have him as a state councilor. “…Let me no assistant for a state, but keep a farm and carters.”(2.2.178-179). The conversation that Hamlet and Polonius have shows Polonius that Hamlet has gone insane with the way he acts. This isn’t an act of insanity it is an act of being bad-mannered but with a little kick to it. The kick is that Polonius doesn’t even realize how Hamlet is insulting him, he’s completely blinded with just the fact that Hamlets insane that he doesn’t take anything to offence. When Polonius confronts Hamlet and asks if he recognizes him, Hamlet responds in a rude and impertinent manner by saying, “Excellent well. You are a fishmonger.”(2.2.187). Anyone would take that to offence if they are high arched but Polonius takes it as a way that he really is insane. Nobody is able to see through Hamlet at this point and are so convinced that he is insane that they completely forget that Hamlets to brilliant to go insane. In Act two Hamlets not insane and the reason for this belief is because no man turns that insane too quickly.

In Act two scene two right after Polonius exits Rosencrantz and Guildenstern have a talk with Hamlet and this is the breakthrough in Act two because it shows you how Hamlet still ahs his sanity. The reason for this is because he confronts them about knowing how they are spying on him for the king. Take in mind there has been no incident where Hamlet has overheard a conversation, he knows this just by how his fellow friends are acting. Only a sane person that knows his friends very well would be able to see through them as well as Hamlet does. Shakespeare is giving the reader a little piece of Hamlet to show them that Hamlet hasn’t lost his mind but simply playing with everyone’s heads. “…You were sent for, and there is a kind of confession in your looks, which your modesties have not craft enough to color. I know the good King and Queen have sent for you.”(2.2.285-289). Shakespeare is showing off Hamlets character with his knowledge of intelligence and that Hamlet is on top of everything and everyone.

In Act two Hamlet has everyone on their toes wondering if this is an act of insanity or just an act. Hamlet is playing his cards so well that he has everyone contradicting his mental state. Hamlet and only Hamlet truly knows what his mental state is like at the moment but with putting the pieces together it rears more towards him just being a cunning and underhanded man that is at the state of mind of sanity.

Ghassan F said...

Show Hamlet is insane

In William Shakespeare’s Hamlet, Hamlet is found introducing is insanity in act 2. Throughout scene 1 of act 2, Hamlet displays the most irregular behavior ever displayed, as he meets with Ophelia. With his pants unfastened, stockings hung around his ankles, and with the whole body shaking, Hamlet meets Ophelia by surprise.

“Ophelia: My lord, as I was sewing in my closet,
Lord Hamlet, with his doublet all unbraced;
No hat upon his head; his stockings foul'd,
Ungarter'd, and down-gyved to his ancle;
Pale as his shirt; his knees knocking each other;
And with a look so piteous in purport
As if he had been loosed out of hell
To speak of horrors,--he comes before me” (2.1.76-84).

Hamlet is a royal member, and there is so much expected of royal members of displaying sophistication. Hamlet is viewed as insane because no adult in the right balanced mind would treat a 14 year-old girl like that. If Hamlet was normal, then he would meet Ophelia with his pants fastened, socking properly worn, and stable in his movements. Since insane also represents abnormal. With that in mind, reviewing Hamlet’s true behavior, it is proof that all he did was abnormal-therefore insane.

The idea that Hamlet is insane is supported due to the tragic moments and trials that he has gone through. From his father dying, his mother getting married too quickly, and having his girlfriend ignore him and rejecting him could cause such insanity. Hamlet’s feelings that were compressed before hand are now being exhaled in an insane performance.

Katie S said...

By the end of Act 2 in Hamlet written by William Shakespeare, it is evident that triple parallelism is present when looking at the characters, Hamlet, Fortinbras and Laertes. The parallelism is shown in the positions both Hamlet and Fortinbras hold in their kingdoms and also the theme of spying that is present in both Hamlet and Laertes’ lives. It is successful in providing a repetition of themes and elements of the play.

Fortinbras and Hamlet are linked through their situations in their Kingdom; firstly, Fortinbras and Hamlet are princes to their kingdoms. Secondly both characters’ King fathers died, Fortinbras’, at the hand of the prior King Hamlet and Hamlet’s father at the hands of King Claudius, Hamlet’s uncle. The fact that both of the characters’ fathers were murdered which lead to the need to seek revenge, Hamlet and Fortinbras automatically paralleled by filial obligation. After the murders of each character’s father the throne, which would rightfully be theirs is given to their uncles, who are both incapable of the responsibility. The uncles of Fortinbras and Hamlet then publicly humiliate their nephews to downplay their abilities to rule over the throne and to exude their power over their nephews. Claudius takes advantage of his Kingship by restricting Hamlet’s freedom by not allowing him to return to school, ”A heart unfortified, a mind impatient, / An understanding simple and unschool’d/…In going back to Wittenberg, / It is most retrograde to our desire, / and we beseech you bend to remain” (1. 2. 96-115). Here, Claudius speaks of Hamlet as a unintelligent young boy, which implies that he would not be fit to become King, this makes Claudius look like a better King by comparison. Hamlet is bound to obey Claudius because of his position as King and is left with no other choice but to accept Claudius’ insults and orders. Fortinbras is found in the same situation when his uncle, King of Norway prohibits Fortinbras’ freedom, “On Fortinbras; which he, in brief, obeys; /Receives rebuke from Norway, and in fine/Makes vow before his uncle never more/To give the assay of arms against your majesty.”(2.2.68-71). The King of Norway displays the power he has over Fortinbras by not allowing him to and also making him promise never to attack Denmark, this act of humiliation succeeds in the same ways as Hamlet’s humiliation. Fortinbras and Hamlet’s situations parallel each other in order to present the theme of revenge.

More evidence of parallelism is found when comparing characters Laertes and Hamlet, this parallel is used to reiterate the theme of spying. Both Hamlet and Laertes are victims of spying when Claudius and Polonius use spies in order to see the ‘real’ character of both men when neither is present. Polonius first sends Reynaldo, his servant, to spy on his son, Laertes and then suggests King Claudius spy on Hamlet. Polonius tells Reynaldo to get Laertes in a venerable state by getting him drunk so that he can see how he acts in ‘real’ situations. “Before you visit him, to make inquire/ of his behaviour” (2. 1. 4-5) by spying on Laertes while he is away in Paris, Polonius is able to stay in control over Laertes and his life. In the same way, Hamlet is spied on in order to solve the puzzle of his sanity; after presenting an antic disposition, Hamlet’s sanity is put into question. King Claudius enlists Hamlet’s childhood friends to talk to Hamlet to find out what is wrong with him but this fails because Hamlet realizes it is a set up. In order to find out the true reason for Hamlet’s actions Polonius recommends King Claudius spy on Hamlet by using Ophelia to bait the truth out of him, because she is Hamlet’s love interest. Polonius tells Claudius his plan to spy on Hamlet, “…I’ll loose my daughter to him. / Be you and I behind an arras then, / Mark the encounter.” (2. 2. 162-164).

In Shakespeare’s Hamlet, Shakespeare presents the audience with triple parallelism in order to reinstate themes throughout the play. By the end of Act 2 it is evident that there is a parallel between Fortinbras and Hamlet as well as between Hamlet and Laertes to reinforce the theme of spying and revenge.

Kathryn B said...

The significance of Ophelia:

The second act of Shakespeare’s Hamlet introduces Ophelia as an innocent and extremely obedient daughter, an almost uninteresting character in the play that will later on emerge into a compelling representation of woman to add complexity to the story. In the later part of act two, Ophelia is revealed as an epitome of unsophistication and purity, creating a satiric parallelism to the queen and whose characterization plays a part in female criticism.
Being a naïve daughter who meekly obeys her father’s orders, Ophelia highlights Polonius’s intention and stresses his manipulative ways. “No, my good lord, but as you did command, I did repel his letters and denied his access to me” (2. 1. 105-110). Through her submission towards her father’s request, Ophelia adds a sense of emotional impact on the audience, proving that her innocence makes her a victim of the situation. In addition, Polonius’s plan of using his own daughter as bait to reveal Hamlet’s real condition reflects Ophelia’s only purpose for him. “At such a time I’ll lose my daughter to him. Be you and I behind an arras then” (2. 2. 160). Ophelia, permitting herself to be used as a tool to execute her father’s deeds and considerably believing Polonius’s claims of Hamlet’s feelings as an excuse for his carnal needs, illustrates the significance of women in the play. Unquestioningly bearing the restrictions of her position, Ophelia’s character evokes the audience’s different attitudes toward women.
Ophelia, being equally loved and adored by Hamlet, ironically serves as a foil for Queen Gertrude’s character. In act two, Hamlet relates Ophelia to the heavens and expresses his undying adoration for her. “To the celestial and my soul’s idol, the most beautified Ophelia” (2. 2. 105-110). Ophelia provides a mournful distraction for Hamlet to contemplate on his actions rather than be consumed by vengeance. Unlike the queen, whose moral sense has been corrupted, Ophelia portrays innocence, the only thing that Hamlet can save and preserve in Denmark. Also, the letter in act two depicts Ophelia, as a symbol of hope that Hamlet has for the kingdom. “O dear Ophelia, I am ill at these numbers. I have not art to reckon my groans. But that I love thee best, O most best, believe it. Adieu” (2. 2. 115-120). Being the only person that Hamlet has, Ophelia intensifies Hamlet’s emotion, giving him hope and causing him to step into the world of insanity to save the innocent.
In act two of Hamlet, Ophelia, as a device used by Polonius, Hamlet and Shakespeare, sheds a light of atonement to the play, stressing the idea of hope in the midst of humanity’s destruction. As the play progresses William Shakespeare’s Ophelia, hones to be a more significant role to the audience than she is to any character in the play or to Shakespeare himself.

Adrian V said...

Show that Hamlet is sane in act two

Act two of Hamlet is key in foretelling the future outcome of the play. In act two, various developments are made to the plot which reveal more of Hamlet's character. By the end of act two, Hamlet is sane. Hamlet's sanity is exemplified through his reasoning, manipulation, and strategy.

Reasoning is one of the major contributions that Hamlet exemplifies in order to prove that he maintains his sanity. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern were sent to spy on Hamlet by orders of King Claudius and Queen Gertrude. After some discussion with his long-time friends, Hamlet states that he know “the good King and Queen have sent for you” (2, 2, 281). It is through his reasoning that he sees the “kind of confession in [their] looks” (2, 2, 279) and comes to the conclusion that they have been sent to spy on him. Hamlet then manipulates this situation to extrapolate information from the brothers by asking them to “be even and direct with [him] whether [they] were sent for or no” (2, 2, 287-88). Hamlet knows that his “uncle-father and aunt-mother are deceived” (2, 2, 372) because he can sense their confusion. This is why they forced Rosencrantz and Guildenstern to spy on him. They believe that Hamlet is none the wiser in discovering that it was Claudius who killed King Hamlet, they believe that Hamlet's apparent insanity is brought upon by both his love for Ophelia and his grief of King Hamlet's death. It is through this reasoning that the audience is able to gage Hamlet's sanity. Both the reasoning and the manipulation he uses with relationship with Ophelia are key.

Hamlet manipulates the thoughts of others regarding his relationship with Ophelia. This is a milestone in proving Hamlet's sanity because he is able to distract everyone from discovering that he has heard about Claudius murdering King Hamlet. In a conversation with Polonius, Hamlet relates various sources back to Ophelia. Hamlet tells the story of Jephthah, a judge of Israel, who had “one fair daughter who he loved passing well” (2, 2, 403-04). Polonius makes this connection to his daughter, Ophelia, and Hamlet's speech makes him think about Hamlet's love for her. Given the circumstance that Polonius ordered Ophelia to “admit no messengers, receive no tokens” (2, 2, 144) he believes that Hamlet has been driven to insanity because of a crushed heart. It is through this manipulation that Hamlet twists his relationship with Ophelia into his favour to prove his antic disposition.

Hamlet's strategy is the final key in proving that he is a sane individual. After act one, it is unclear as to whether or not the Ghost can be trusted. Because of this, Hamlet requests that the actors put on a performance of “The Murder of Gonzago” (2, 2, 532). This play reflects “the murder of [Hamlet's] father” (2, 2, 591). The broad view of Hamlet's strategy comes into perspective when he mentions this. He also states that he will “observe [Claudius'] looks” (2, 2, 592) and if he appears to be uncomfortable with the play, Hamlet will know that the Ghost had been telling the truth about King Hamlet's murder. This is a crucial component of Hamlet's strategy because it guarantees any suspicion that Claudius murdered King Hamlet. Also, Hamlet uses strategy with his relationship with Ophelia to give himself a strategic advantage. Since Hamlet emphasizes his lust for Ophelia, he makes the others, including Claudius, Gertrude, and Polonius, believe that it is his broken heart that caused his antic disposition. In reality, however, Hamlet's antic disposition is rooted in his strategy against King Claudius. Hamlet's strategies of using the play to confirm that Claudius killed King Hamlet and of using his relationship with Ophelia to justify his antic disposition are the final key in exemplifying Hamlet's sanity.

The key components that justify Hamlet's sanity are his reasoning, his manipulation of others through his relationship with Ophelia, and his opening strategies. These are all components in proving the sanity in the individual. Therefore, exemplifying all of these characteristics, Hamlet is a sane individual.

Paula I said...

In order to go about getting his revenge on the Claudius, Hamlet comes up with a genius plan to act crazy, not only to buy time but also to have freedom of speech. Hamlet decides “To put an antic disposition on”(1.5.180) purposely so that no one will take him seriously. This is a wise move because he knows that Claudius is keeping a close watch on him, but if he starts to think that Hamlet has truly become crazy, he’ll get careless and not worry so much about him being a threat. Hamlet takes advantage his situation, by devising his plan, after all the resent events that have happened to him are reasonable to lead a man to insanity. Hamlet is extremely intelligent because he is able to act crazy, “Sith nor th’ exterior nor the inward man/ Resembles that it was” (2.2.6-7) and put on a convincing transformation. Despite his convincing display Claudius wants to be sure of what’s really going on, if Hamlet is really insane and why, so he sends for Rosencrantz and Guildenstern. He is not satisfied with the queen’s rationalization of Hamlets madness which is “His fathers death and our o’er-hasty marriage” (2.2.57). He is clearly worried about Hamlet’s actions (doesn’t fully buy into his insanity) and longs to know the reason, “O speak of that: that do I long to hear” (2.2.50) is his desperate response to Polonius’ news that he has found the reason for it. However despite Polonius’ reasonable explanation that love has driven Hamlet mad he wants to “try it further” (2.2.159) to make sure. Hamlet has planed every move he made. He knows that Claudius is the most vital person that needs to buy into his act, and he cleverly takes advantage of the opportunity present: Ophelia is denies him. So he incorporates that as another reason to present to Claudius. That is why it was so important for him to act crazy in front of Ophelia, because if he acts crazy in front of her than it would be harder to doubt his insanity. Hamlet knows that if he appears to Ophelia “with his doublet all unbrac’d,/ No hat upon his head, his stockings foul’d… knees knocking each other” (2.1.78-81) that she would be concerned and tell her father according to plan. Hamlet than anticipates the next move: Polonius will tell Claudius, and insure him of the reason for Hamlet’s craziness; that being unrequited love. Hamlet still has his wits has can be seen through his witty and cunning slurs at Polonius like calling him a “fishmonger” (2.2.174) or “O Jephthah, judge of Israel” (2.2.399). As well the fact that hamlet says “You cannot, sir take from me anything that I will/ not more willingly part withal- except my life, except my life, except my life” (2.2.215-217) shows sanity, because he is unwilling to give up his life. Even Polonius realized “Though this be madness yet there is a method/ in’t” (2.2.205-206). Hamlet is not insane because he is still very much aware of what is going on around him, including that Rosencrantz and Guildenstern where sent to spy on him “there is a kind of confession in your looks, which your/ modesties have not craft enough to colour. I know/ the good King and Queen have sent for you” (2.2. 279-281). He psychologically tricks them into admitting it by using logically reasoning, “you must teach me… by the rights of our fellowship, by the consonancy of/ our youth, by the obligation of our every-preserved/ love” (2.2.283-286), and they have no choice but to surrender the truth. Hamlet then makes it very clear that he is sane, “I have of late, but wherefore/ I know not, lost all my mirth, forgone all custom/ Of exercises; and indeed it goes heavily with my disposition” (2.2.295-298) he knows that his behavior has changed but that it is also part of his antic disposition. His “But my uncle-father and aunt-mother are deceived” (2.2.372) by his acting. “I am mad north-north-west. When the wind is/ southerly, I know a hawk from a handsaw” (2.2.374-375) although he seems to act crazy sometimes in reality he is sane and not oblivious to what’s going on. Further proof of Hamlet’s discerning state of mind is that he can contemplate his acts and form a logical and clever plan to test Claudius’s guilt to see if the ghost was telling the truth. He rationalizes that “I’ll have grounds/ more relative than this” (2.2.599-600) and that way he’ll be sure of what’s real. He hires actors to play The murder of Gonzago but changes “a speech of some dozen or sixteen lines, which/ I would set down and insert in’t,?” (2.2.535-536). Furthermore Hamlet at no point has lost sight of his cause and feels he has even procrastinated “Yet I … unpregnant of my cause,/ And can say nothing—no, not for a king” (2.2.561, 564), because he has been waiting so long for the right moment “the son of a dear father murder’d/ Prompted to my revenge by heaven and hell/ Must like a whore unpack my heart with words” (2.2.579-581) to make his key move that will cause Claudius to make a public admission; that way he can’t be accused of treason.

Alex R said...

In the play Hamlet, Prince of Denmark, Young Hamlet (the protagonist), Laertes (the character foil), and Young Fortinbras (the antagonist) all have actions happen to them in Act I, that seems to align their fate by the end of Act II. The first example of such a parallelism is in the fate of both Young Hamlet, and Young Fortinbras. Both of their fathers were killed, and both were replaced by their uncle. King Hamlet killed King Fortinbras, which lead to young Fortinbras filial obligation to take revenge on Denmark. Young Hamlet too is held up to his filial obligation when a ghost looking like the late King appears to him in the middle of the night saying he was murdered by the present King, Claudius. Both have the obligation to uphold their family honor (using the term loosely), “In filial obligation for some term / To do obsequious sorrow” (1.2.91-92) To add to the chaos that each of their father’s death brings (which that in its self is another parallel), both of them have their uncles usurp the crown (it is not known if the case is true with Fortinbras, but the crown is still taken by his uncle). The second case of parallels can be found between Hamlet and Laertes. After Laertes goes away, his father, Polonius wants Reynaldo to go and spy on his son. This is just to check up on him, and see what Laertes is like when no one is around. This is a parallel to Hamlet being spied upon by Rosencrantz and Guildenstern. The King orders this to truly see what is going on with Hamlet, as his actions have caused rumors around the country, “Of Hamlet’s transformation-so I call it…” (2.2.5). Spying is a common element thought the play, as both Hamlet and his foil experience it. The parallels between Laertes, Hamlet and Fortinbras are shown throughout the play. What this does to the audience is to reinforce a certain point, which will later become oblivious later in the play.

Jordan S said...

In Act 2, it is evident that Hamlet displays a sense of insanity through the way he acts towards others. Hamlet comes up with a genius plan “To put an antic disposition on”(1.5.180) purposely so that nobody takes him seriously.

Hamlet begins by displaying very odd behaviour to those that approach him. When Polonius asks, "Do you know me, my lord?" (2.2.173) Hamlet responds to him as if he really is going crazy with, "Excellent well. You are a fishmonger." (2.2.174). This statement hints to Polonius that maybe something really is wrong with Hamlet.

Hamlet's attempt of exposing his insanity to Ophelia is very creative. The way he enters the stage with his pants literally around his ankles catches Ophelia at surprise. From the Hamlet she knew she would expect him to be less "revealing."

At one point, the reader must think that Hamlet's act may actually overpower his true sanity. He may forget that he is sane and drift closer to actually becoming insane.

Mr. Liconti said...

Over the last few submissions, I have cut an pasted your lines stuck me. This week, I would like to point out comments that your classmates made which follow the criteria which was outlined at the start of the course.
These examples are not wordy, all arguments are supported with sufficent textual refrences, and the writing structure is solid.

Linh H
Robyn E
David S
Adrian V

There were other comments to this weeks blog entry that approach the writing criteria, and others which clearly did not come close to the requirements.
Remeber that writing is a process, and that a component of this process is reviewing your writing before you publish it.