Response to Course Materials February 22nd

     In the past few weeks, we finished up Hamlet. After two-ish months on the play, we started reading Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead, which made this girl feel like a catfish out of water. However, before we could delve too deep into the next play, we had to work on our final exam project. My group made a video synthesizing the first three works: The American Dream, Death of a Salesman, and Hamlet. I had a great time making the video and we actually learned some interesting information on the characters in the three plays during our research. I also found some of the other projects pretty cool. Andi's project on "Shakesqueer" was super well-researched and I learned a bunch of stuff I didn't know about queer theory.
     After spending three days presenting and discussing the final exam projects, we were able to finish R+G. However, I missed a good deal of the discussion and most of the movie because I was at 7th grade camp, so I don't feel like I have as good of a grasp on this play as the others. One of the big points we discussed was whether or not it can actually be qualified as falling under the Theatre of the Absurd. Because the play goes past the simple "life is meaningless" mantra of typical Theatre of the Absurd works, I don't think it is. Although the play had some funny and meaningful parts, I didn't enjoy it as much as the others. Absurdist writers in general bother me because it seems like they think they know some sort of deep truth about the world that no one else knows. Tom Stoppard especially comes off as very pretentious.
     Right now, I'm just excited to finish up discussing R+G and then start Frankenstein.

Open Prompt pt. 2 February 15th

     In William Shakespeare’s Hamlet, the title character fulfills the qualifications of a tragic hero because he begins as a prosperous prince, but loses the things that are most precious to him. Hamlet not only causes the deaths of multiple characters, whether directly or indirectly, but also loses his own life. Through the choices Hamlet makes, he epitomizes the theme of the play: moral confusion along with isolation can lead to paranoia and corruption and the upset of the natural order.

     Young Hamlet is clearly a tragic hero. Before the play begins, Hamlet is the Prince of Denmark at school in Wittenberg, awaiting the crown. King Hamlet’s own brother, Claudius, poisons him and becomes king. The first act of Hamlet finds the prince distraught about his father’s recent death and mother’s abrupt marriage to young Hamlet’s uncle. As a thirtysomething prince, Hamlet had everything going for him, but lost it all because of his uncle’s actions. In order to avoid suspicion, Hamlet pretends to be insane as he tries to decide whether or not to avenge his father’s death. As the play progresses, the distinction between Hamlet’s pretend and real madness grows foggy, leaving the audience to pity his indecision. This pity that the audience feels is essential to what makes a tragic character tragic.

     Hamlet’s indecision, however, does not only affect himself. As his madness progresses, constantly crossing the line between real and imaginary, he begins to make rash decisions. For example, when the Prince is in his mother’s closet, he thinks he hears a spy behind a curtain and before even considering it, stabs a hidden Polonius to death. In this way, Hamlet’s own personal tragedy directly causes the suffering of another character. He also causes the tragic death of other characters indirectly. Hamlet basically brings on Ophelia’s suicide. First, he breaks her heart by being incredibly crass and cold toward her and then kills her father. Although Hamlet did not do any of the killing, his tragic quest brought on Ophelia’s death. Hamlet negatively affects almost every character in the play.
     By bringing tragedy upon himself and others, Hamlet contributes to the meaning of the work as a whole. Throughout the play, Hamlet is trying to decide whether or not to kill his uncle. His main concern is whether or not Claudius’ murder would be against God’s will. Since there is no way of knowing exactly what God wants, Hamlet cannot make his decision. Furthermore, because Hamlet is pretty much isolated from the outside world, both geographically and emotionally. In the end, many of the characters meet tragic ends, showing how Hamlet’s own confusion and isolation led to a disruption of the natural order.

Open Prompt pt. 1 February 8th

2003. According to critic Northrop Frye, “Tragic heroes are so much the highest points in their

human landscape that they seem the inevitable conductors of the power about them, great

trees more likely to be struck by lightning than a clump of grass. Conductors may of course be

instruments as well as victims of the divisive lightning.” Select a novel or play in which a tragic

figure functions as an instrument of the suffering of others. Then write an essay in which you

explain how the suffering brought upon others by that figure contributes to the tragic vision of

the work as a whole.

Response 1:

The first author does a good job of addressing all parts of the prompt in the introduction in a clear and concise fashion. He or she seems to have a solid grasp of language and can employ it well. The essay is divided into three different sections, each with their own separate argument. The author does summarize the plot, but also points to a particular event and explains how it affects the meaning of the work. The second body paragraph is a little weak and unnecessary; the author does not make a very strong point and it barely moves past plot summary. In the third body paragraph, though, the author explains how Gatsby as a tragic character unwittingly causes the suffering of others. The conclusion nicely wraps up the essay while adding more information. The overall structure of the essay is solid and easy to follow, but it still has some flaws and I do not think it deserves the 9 it received.

Response 2:

The second author begins by unnecessarily restating the quote from the prompt, which is not a very strong start. The introduction touches on the main parts of the prompt, but does not explain how the tragic character contributes to the meaning of the work as a whole. The first body paragraph is basically just a summary of the plot and brings up Hamlet without any sort of introduction. The paragraph does not even attempt to answer the prompt until the last few sentences, in which the author only touches on it. The next paragraph seems to have the beginnings of a decent analysis, but fails to completely explain the point it’s trying to make. The concluding paragraph just summarizes what was said in the essay without adding a fresh perspective. The essay ends abruptly, leaving the reader with only a vague idea of what the author is trying to prove. Overall, there is far too much plot summary and very little actual analysis.

Response 3:

The introduction of the third essay leaves much to be desired. Although it does, in a way, answer the prompt, the author does not explain nearly enough and does not connect the character to the meaning of the work. The second paragraph, which is only four sentences, is seemingly pointless and basically adds nothing to the essay as a whole. In the third paragraph, the author adds “downfall and destruction” in parentheses, supposedly to explain how McMurphy is a tragic character. The author goes on to end the paragraph with the vague statement, “others suffer along the way.” He or she does not seem to have a firm grasp of either the meaning of the prompt or the work and throws in a few advanced words here and there for no apparent reason. This essay is just a pretty length summary of One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest and does not answer the prompt whatsoever.