In class we are finishing up the relationship between the Hamlet father and son in preparation for your paper.
As well, I am handing out a copy of the abridged edition of the MLA handbook. Please hold on to this; you will need it all year.
The following is a copy of your class handout on the paper.
English III Honors Hamlet essay. Due Wednesday October 6
Based upon the following criteria of blood-revenge, discuss how Hamlet exemplifies-or does not- this act.
Requirements: TYPED (no exceptions)
MLA format- including header and pagination
Size 12, Times New Roman
MINIMUM of 500 words; include word count- under tools
MINIMUM of 6 specific textual references with Act, scene and
annotation.
Please make arrangements to see me soon, if you need support. Plan on bringing your outline. I am available periods 1, 2, 4, and 6, as well as before and after school. Can’t come then? Communicate by e-mail with specific questions. dolly.parker@rcsdk12.org
Keep in mind your thesis! This is a fact based essay, not an opinion of the play or its author. You make statements, you support them with specific evidence and you give an analysis. Of course, it is necessary to have carefully read the play.
BLOOD-REVENGE: A custom nearly universal in the tribal or clan stage of society, often surviving later, binding the kin of a murdered man to secure satisfaction for the murder by the death of the slayer or of one of his clan. The custom depends upon two fundamentals of that stage of civilization: (1) the sacredness of life and the solidarity of the clan; (2) the lex talionis. Its essence is execution of the slayer or some of his kin by the representatives of the slain, not by public authorities; it belongs therefore to private as opposed to public justice. In nomadic society the perpetuation of the clan depends upon its fighting strength and its sense of unity. Hence assault upon a member of the clan, if attended with even unintended fatal results, involves the tribe, clan, or family of the slain in what is felt to be a sacred duty, the avenging of the shedding of blood. The custom is important from the standpoint of utilitarian ethics, since the knowledge that reparation will be demanded by the clan of the assailed restrains a potential assailant from wanton attack and makes men more careful in ordinary intercourse. The duty set by the institution is binding, and so close is the relationship in the clan that all its members may become involved, the result being a blood-feud between the clans of the assailant and the victim. Usually, however, the duty devolves upon the next of kin. Refusal on his part to exercise his right and perform his duty subjects him to utter contempt and even to outlawry (http://www.ccel.org/s/schaff/encyc/encyc02/htm/iv.v.clviii.htm).
Based upon the following criteria of blood-revenge, discuss how Hamlet exemplifies-or does not- this act.
Requirements: TYPED (no exceptions)
MLA format- including header and pagination
Size 12, Times New Roman
MINIMUM of 500 words; include word count- under tools
MINIMUM of 6 specific textual references with Act, scene and
annotation.
Please make arrangements to see me soon, if you need support. Plan on bringing your outline. I am available periods 1, 2, 4, and 6, as well as before and after school. Can’t come then? Communicate by e-mail with specific questions. dolly.parker@rcsdk12.org
Keep in mind your thesis! This is a fact based essay, not an opinion of the play or its author. You make statements, you support them with specific evidence and you give an analysis. Of course, it is necessary to have carefully read the play.
BLOOD-REVENGE: A custom nearly universal in the tribal or clan stage of society, often surviving later, binding the kin of a murdered man to secure satisfaction for the murder by the death of the slayer or of one of his clan. The custom depends upon two fundamentals of that stage of civilization: (1) the sacredness of life and the solidarity of the clan; (2) the lex talionis. Its essence is execution of the slayer or some of his kin by the representatives of the slain, not by public authorities; it belongs therefore to private as opposed to public justice. In nomadic society the perpetuation of the clan depends upon its fighting strength and its sense of unity. Hence assault upon a member of the clan, if attended with even unintended fatal results, involves the tribe, clan, or family of the slain in what is felt to be a sacred duty, the avenging of the shedding of blood. The custom is important from the standpoint of utilitarian ethics, since the knowledge that reparation will be demanded by the clan of the assailed restrains a potential assailant from wanton attack and makes men more careful in ordinary intercourse. The duty set by the institution is binding, and so close is the relationship in the clan that all its members may become involved, the result being a blood-feud between the clans of the assailant and the victim. Usually, however, the duty devolves upon the next of kin. Refusal on his part to exercise his right and perform his duty subjects him to utter contempt and even to outlawry (http://www.ccel.org/s/schaff/encyc/encyc02/htm/iv.v.clviii.htm).
Maddy Orcutt-
ReplyDeleteI like the puns that the Gravedigger and Hamlet were using. The puns were whose 'lying' about who the grave belongs to and whose 'lying' down in the grave.
Hamlet: "I think it be thine, indeed, for thou liest in ’t."
Gravedigger: "You lie out on ’t, sir, and therefore it is not yours. For my part, I do not lie in ’t, and yet it is mine."
Hamlet: "Thou dost lie in ’t, to be in ’t and say it is thine. 'Tis for the dead, not for the quick. Therefore thou liest."
I'm glad that Hamlet wasn't punished for killing Polonius after all it was an accident. But why is Claudius encouraging others to kill Hamlet? I'm starting to think that Claudius is no match for Hamlet!
ReplyDeleteWas killing polonious really an accident or is that what they want us to believe?hamlet has been so brainwashed by the ghost he probably doesn't even know l
ReplyDeleteor take into consideration on what he is really doing. Parts of me thinks that hamlet needs to get a little bit of a back bone and do what he really wants to do because if not he is going to be the one that gets killed to in the long run all because of this ghost " his father"
helene
ReplyDeletewhy is there debate over ophelias funeral? whats the point? shes dead......
Olivia
ReplyDeleteSo in the scene with the gravediggers when Hamlet asks them whose graves they're digging up, do they know the exact people or not? Like back then did they just put people in the ground without a tombstone? How would you find a specific person?
peri - Hamlet will always be the legitimate heir to the throne and Claudius is only temporary king until Hamlet can dethrone him. He will always be a threat to Claudius, so he must kill Hamlet indirectly before that happens.
ReplyDeleteshanelle-
ReplyDeletenow that polonius is dead will Hamlet change the way he acts?
Why has Hamlet Father did this to him. This isn't love for a son to ruin his life?
ReplyDeleteI do not get what is the big deal with Ophelia funeral... Whats going on?
ReplyDeleteWas the ghost actually trying to make Hamlet kill Polonius or was it really an accident?
ReplyDeleteWhay is the ghost encouraging Hamlet to kill, is he trying to make Hamlet do his dirty work that he didn't finish before he died?
I feel like Hamlet's father's ghost set him up. Now I'm starting to feel like the ghost was a bad entity. it seem like things got worse after the ghost spoke to Hamlet, and "GUIDED" him in the wrong vengeful direction.
ReplyDeleteking claudius isn't a very good uncle. Was it like okay to tell people to kill your nephew back then?
ReplyDelete