Hamlet's "romantic" gesture

In Act II, scene i of Hamlet, Ophelia reveals to Polonius the strange nature of Hamlet. During a class discussion, we discussed three potential reasons for Hamlet's wild behavior: 
1. Hamlet is madly in love with Ophelia and their separation is driving him mad,
2. Hamlet is simply putting on an act, or
3. Hamlet is actually insane.

Polonius believes that Hamlet is lusting for Ophelia and that their disrupted relationship is upsetting him. As Hamlet "long stayed" (II.i.103) holding on to Ophelia's wrist. This hold can be seen as intimate, and his prolonged hold can portray a longing for intimacy with Ophelia. His sigh that seemed to "shatter all his bulk" (II.i.107) implies that his strength and masculinity are shed away with his sigh, exposing his affections towards Ophelia and his "weakness" because of it. As he leaves her, he keeps his eyes fixed upon her, "to the last bended their light on [her]" (II.i.112), expressing longing for her and a reluctance to look away. 

Because Ophelia agrees to her father's commands and refuses communication with Hamlet, Polonius believes that this "hath made him mad" (II.i.123). As a result, Polonius regrets his commands and believes that Hamlet is indeed faithful in his love for Ophelia. He fears that Hamlet's inability to express his love for Ophelia will cause more troubles than "hate to utter" (II.i.133).

After encountering his father's spirit and hearing the deeds of Claudius and Gertrude, Hamlet is left bewildered and frantic. He tells his peers that he will "put an antic disposition on" (I.v.192), warning them that they are to tell no one that he is simply acting. His putting on a disposition makes him "seem" rather than "is," which is portrayed when Ophelia describes his appearance during the night he visits her. During his visit, Ophelia happens to be sewing in her closet. She describes him with "his doublet all unbraced" (II.i.88), his socks dirty and fallen to his ankles. Her sewing and his appearance all provide the symbolism of "seeming" rather than "being," emphasizing the possibility that Hamlet is putting on an act.

Hamlet's sanity is in question after he holds a conversation with his father's spirit. Prior to this encounter, Marcellus and Horatio warn him that the ghost may "deprive [him] sovereignty of reason / And draw [him] into madness" (I.v.81-82), bringing him past the brink of insanity. Their fear of his delving into insanity is seen when they physically restrain him from following the spirit, holding him back and forcing him to threaten to "make a ghost of him that lets me" (I.v.95). Already at this point, Hamlet seems mad as he so enthusiastically wishes to follow after his father's ghost, threatening to kill any who holds him back. 

During his visit to Ophelia's home, Hamlet is described to look as though "he had been loosèd out of hell" (II.i.93), which could refer back to his father's spirit and his peers' pleas not to go after it. With his "hand thus o'er his brow" (II.i.101), he gestures towards his mind, as he did after he meets his father's ghost. He makes mention of his "distracted globe" (I.v.104), with annotations that imply that he's perhaps gesturing towards his head. 

Although Hamlet's current state of mind is unclear, his bizarre behavior could foreshadow that an unlikely event is about to occur.

King Hamlet's story

Henry Fuseli, Horatio, Hamlet, and the Ghost, 1798

In Act I, scene v of Hamlet, young Hamlet encounters the ghost of his father, a spirit at unrest because of the nature behind his death. During this scene, his father opens up to Hamlet the true reason for his death, revealing the evil deeds of Claudius and Gertrude, the new king and his newlywed queen. 

King Hamlet's passionate anger towards his brother can be seen when he calls him "that incestuous, that adulterate beast" (I.v.49). This is similar to when young Hamlet compares his mother to a beast when referring to her marriage to Claudius only two months after King Hamlet's death. He mentions how "a beast that wants discourse of reason / Would have mourned longer" (I.ii.155), showing how he sees his mother as less than a beast lacking the ability to reason. 

Hamlet's father continues to say how his wife was won over by Claudius' gift to seduce, referring to his wife as "seeming-virtuous" (I.v.53). The use of "seeming" portrays the queen as only having the appearance of being of virtues. This is similar to when young Hamlet speaks about seeming versus being, that seeming is simply "actions that a man might play" (I.ii.87), showing that Gertrude is simply acting as virtuous as necessary to uphold her reputation. His father is implying that it isn't only Claudius who fooled the state but also Gertrude, whose "lewdness court [virtue] in a shape of heaven" (I.v.61). King Hamlet speaks about how his love for his wife was of dignity, while her love and gifts "were poor / To those of [his]" (I.v.58-59). 

After his death, King Hamlet appears to be aggravated by the fact that he died without any final rites, "unhousseled, disappointed, unaneled" (I.v.84). He mentions how he is laid to rest with imperfections on his head, implying that he still has regrets and guilts he's unable to overcome because of his death. This could imply that he's currently not in hell but rather purgatory, as he makes mentions of how he is "confined to fast in fires" (I.v.16) until his crimes have been "burnt and purged away" (I.v.18). His death before he could repent for his misdeeds would force him into purgatory, where he would have to atone for his sins until he be allowed to enter heaven. 

Near the end of the ghost's story, young Hamlet is told to not let the "royal bed of Denmark be / A couch for luxury and damnèd incest" (I.v.89-90). In addition to pleas before about obtaining revenge for his murder, the King is basically telling Hamlet to act out against his uncle, perhaps even to the lengths of murdering him. After all, achieving this revenge would be through killing the killer. King Hamlet tells Hamlet to leave his mother to alone, to "leave her to heaven" (I.v.93), where there she will have to repent for the misdeeds she's committed. 

It doesn't seem as though King Hamlet realizes the extent of the request he asks of young Hamlet. By asking that he seek revenge for his murder, King Hamlet is upsetting the state of their kingdom. Although the state is already unrest, seeing as the king was murdered by his brother, his request is inevitably going to drag the state even further into unrest, by having his son kill the new king. Though his desires are understandable, he isn't thinking through what he's asking young Hamlet to do, which is basically to commit treason as Claudius had done. 

an invisible man

in·vis·i·ble

inˈvizəbəl

unable to be seen, not visible to the eye; treated as if unable to be seen; ignored or not taken into consideration

What makes an invisible man? Can he be invisible in a sense that he is a wallflower - unnoticed by all but still in existence? Or is he invisible to a point that his own existence is questionable? 


For the unnamed narrator of Ralph Ellison's Invisible Man, he does indeed exist. His invisibility, however, comes because "people refuse to see [him]" (3). Their refusal stems not from their physical eyes but their inner eyes, the eyes that give perception to their sensation of sight. These inner eyes are the ones that give interpretations to what the physical eyes see. While his outward appearance is ignored by the physical outer eyes, the inner eyes attributes to the sight their own mental images, "figments of their imagination" (3).

His obsession with light comes from his belief that light gives form. Without light he has no form, and according to him, "to be unaware of one's form is to live a death" (7). This is symbolic to one's understanding of his or her own identity. Living a death is a paradox, but so is not knowing yourself; after all, the one you're most familiar with should be yourself. Without your own being, you have no being. However, this is hard to achieve for the narrator as he sometimes doubts his existence. He sometimes seeks attention from others, striking his fists, cursing and swearing, but "alas, it's seldom successful" (4). His desire for attention is the result of being ignored a majority of his life. He wishes not for praise and approval but just to be noticed.

The speaker tells us how "truth is the light and light is the truth" (7), drawing a parallel to Plato's Allegory of the Cave. Enlightenment was achieved through exposure to the sun, the largest source of light, while those who were unenlightened were lit only by the glow of a fireplace, a seemingly artificial light. The narrator's desire for more and more light represents his desire for knowledge, for experience, for life. As he's formless without light, his form must be maintained by truth, and for him, truth is not only light but also life. He places emphasis on experience over innocence, regardless of the nature of the experience. 

During a sermon, the speaker hears a congregation of voices crying out about blackness and the sun, describing the sun as "bloody red" (9). Through this description, it can be seen that these people find experience to be undesirable and painful. Blackness, or darkness, is interrupted by the bloodiness of the sun, or light. However, the voices continue to say that "black will make you... or black will un-make you," (10), expressing ambivalence towards the argument of experience versus innocence. The ambivalence is shared by the narrator, who expresses that he has been acquainted with such feelings. 

Despite his encouragements that he's unperturbed with his invisibility, the narrator makes it known that he is still upset. He finds solace in the works of Louis Armstrong, specifically the line, "What did I do to be so black and blue?" His anger towards dreamers and the "innocent" ones is apparent, his belief being that "that kind of foolishness will cause us tragic trouble" (14). Because of his experience with invisibility, he knows not of the life of dreamers.

to a daughter leaving home

To a Daughter Leaving Home
Linda Pastan

1     When I taught you

2     at eight to ride
3     a bicycle, loping along
4     beside you
5     as you wobbled away
6     on two round wheels,
7     my own mouth rounding
8     in surprise when you pulled
9     ahead down the curved
10    path of the park,
11    I kept waiting
12    for the thud of your crash as I
13    sprinted to catch up,
14    while you grew
15    smaller, more breakable
16    with distance,
17    pumping, pumping
18    for your life, screaming
19    with laughter,
20    the hair flapping
21    behind you like a
22    handkerchief waving
23    goodbye.

After reading this poem in class, I realized how the meaning of the poem changes drastically given the different lines. What I interpreted as a drunken car ride ended up to be a memory of a childhood experience, the change in interpretations occurring through the addition of a few more lines.

Given lines 11-18, I interpreted the tone of the poem as very emotional and threatening. It didn't cross my mind that this could be a poem about a bike ride. When I read "pumping, pumping / for your life, screaming" I imagined a frantic individual, unable to control the inevitable "thud of [a] crash" of another. I couldn't decide whether to associate "screaming" with the individual sprinting or the one growing "more breakable with distance," and in addition, I didn't know whether this being about to crash was another individual or perhaps a fallen object. 

When lines 5-10 were added, I was given more visual imagery of the setting. I pictured a drunk driver riding a motorcycle away from the narrator, possibly a family member, friend, or even a stranger, struggling to catch up before an accident were to occur. This led the description of "more breakable with distance" see much more threatening and violent, as if the "thud of [the] crash" would lead to the permanent damage of the individual. 

After lines 1-4 and 19-20 were included, it became clear that this was not a scene of an approaching accident. It was revealed to be memory of a guardian teaching a child how to ride a bike. The terrifying "screaming" instead became screams of joy and glee "with laughter", and the threatening tone transformed to fondness for the past. The impending accident was no longer one that threatened the individual's life, and the individual's growing "more breakable with distance" emphasized his or her small size rather than the danger of the situation. 

When the last three lines were given, the poem read as a situation in which a child was leaving home. The child's ability to ride a bike acted as his or her step into independence, capable of riding away by him- or herself without the help of the parent. Because the path is curved, the parent will soon be unable to see the child riding away, the distance between the two increasing steadily. As a result, the hair waves "like a handkerchief waving goodbye", the first moment during which the parent realizes the child will soon grow up and leave. When I learned the title, the memory is given an emotional tone once more, though not for the life-threatening hypothesis of before.

Through this activity, I learned how significant each line works towards creating meaning for the poem. Even more, my interpretation of the poem's tone had shifted drastically with just the single word "laughter." This provides insight as to how deeply I need to analyze the choices of words and lines within a poem as well as how they contribute to the poem as a whole.