We seem to be done with Hamlet. Finally. I don’t have
anything against the work or Shakespeare – it’s actually the most enjoyable
play we’ve read so far, in my opinion – but watching different renditions of it
ad nauseam is getting a little boring. The movies are all starting to
run together, and all I’ve taken from seeing so many interpretations is that
there are so many interpretations. Some people felt conflicted in reconciling
all of these. I took the opposite approach – if a given interpretation didn’t
match up with what I thought made sense, I acknowledged that there was a point
of ambiguity, but mostly ignored it. Anyway, it’s not like there was a lack of
meaning to discuss; on the contrary, every time we peel back a layer of meaning
to the work, Shakespeare seems to have hidden another one beneath it. We often
talk about how clever Hamlet is with his wordplay, but he’s a fictional
character whose lines are written for him. It’s much more incredible to me that
Shakespeare had the ability to weave so many levels of meaning into his work.
Hamlet might be proficient in wielding language as a weapon, but Shakespeare
must be the master.
I’m excited to read Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead.
I enjoy the humor in Absurdist works. I missed the first day of reading it in
class, so I still have to catch up and work out what themes were introduced,
but it’s interesting to see the action of the play from the viewpoints of two
relatively minor characters who seem to be excluded by everyone else. I
particularly enjoy the “meta-ness” of R&G’s existence, the interaction with
the fourth wall, the question of whether they are actors and whether this is a
play (and which play they are really acting in).
I hope that we do more work to prepare specifically for the
AP test this semester, because I feel like it has been somewhat lacking so far.
I enjoy doing the multiple-choice practice. It feels like I’m taking the SAT
again. I think I’m doing pretty well; I don’t get too many wrong, but when I do
get one wrong, it’s usually when I narrow it down to two options and pick the
wrong one. And then when we see the answer key, I already know the reasoning
that explains why my answer is incorrect and that justifies the correct one. (The
problem is that I have a different train of logic that invalidates the correct
answer and justifies the incorrect one as well.) I think the more we practice,
the more I seem to be able to pick the correct train of thought.
Mayank,
ReplyDeleteI like your point about Shakespeare vs. Hamlet. In a way, Shakespeare is the puppet master Hamlet's always talking about (the God/Fate of the work), just like Stoppard is the one who writes the "lines" that Rosencrantz and Guildenstern refer to.
I definitely agree with you about the AP test and the multiple choice (I, too, have strange trains of logic). A lot of times I just end up getting annoyed with the practice book (because really, how can there only be one correct train of thought?).
I liked how you incorporated your own opinions and feeling about what we did in class. I completely agree with you when you said, " We often talk about how clever Hamlet is with his wordplay, but he’s a fictional character whose lines are written for him". Shakespeare is the one to be receiving the credit for Hamlet's clever wordplay. Surprisingly, I enjoyed reading "Rosentcrantz and Guildenstern are Dead". There were so many double meanings hidden throughout this play which made it enjoyable to read. I too hope that we will have more practice for the AP exam this semester to help us prepare!
ReplyDelete