Finished Comics

comic#1 comic#2 comic#3 comic#4

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Comic's Title: Something's Rotten in the State of Denmark
*first blog entry for the 'My Hamlet Project' is titled "Hamlet Proposals"
*7 entries in all [including this one]

Basis and Process for Comic #4

Act 3, Scene 4, Line 25

Polonius:
O, I am slain.

Polonius . . . announcing his death.

Lines 159-166
Hamlet:
Once more, good night,
And when you are desirous to be blest,
I'll blessing beg of you. For this same lord,
I do repent. But heaven hath pleased it so,
To punish me with this, and this with me,
That I must be their scourge and minister.
I will bestow, and will answer well
The death I gave him.

Hamlet says that his murder of Polonius was an act of faith (Protestant belief) meant to do two things: to punish Hamlet with another murder to repent for, and to punish Polonious
-----------------------
Three jokes exist within the fourth strip of the web comic:
1. Hamlet's lack of remorse, as he proclaims the murder to be an act of faith (as well as the ones he commits in the final act); I have God arrive in the scene to counter-act the 'slander' against him.
2. The general violent nature of the play (suicides, murders, ect.), which I show through an exaggerated amount of blood on Hamlet's clothing and on the tapestry (juxtaposed against a heavanly figure -- judge).
3. Polonius' announcement of his own death; I try to make it more ridiculous by having him say the line well after he is presumed dead by the other characters in the strip.
=============================
Process
It took 69 layers to complete the final web comic for the 'My Hamlet Project'. Although I feel it looks the best out of the four, I must admit that the rhythm is choppier than the others. With little time left to complete a fourth comic (I though three was too few) I could not spend as much time with the continuity of this strip as I did with the previous ones. Overall, I am satisfied with the way my project turned out -- if it were to become an actual web comic, the content would need to expand beyond death related scenes in the play.


Some choices I made:
- a portrait of Claudius was placed above Gertrude's head to allude to the conversation that had taken place
- the bedroom was drawn how I imagined it to look like
- tapestry where Polonius was stabbed is included on the right side of the background (ripped from Hamlet's sword)
- Gertrude was modeled after the Gertrude in Mel Gibson's Hamlet
- "heaven" replaced with "God" to make the joke more clear

Basis and Process for Comic #3

Act 1, Scene 5, line 9 - 25

Ghost:
I am thy father's spirit,
Doomed for a certain term to walk the night
And for the day confined to fast in fires,
Till the foul crimes done in my days of nature
Are burnt and purged away. But that I am forbid
To tell the secrets of my prison house,
I could a tale unfold whose lightest word
Would harrow up thy soul, freeze thy young blood,
Make thy two eyes, like stars, start from their spheres,
Thy knotted and combinèd locks to part
And each particular hair to stand on end,
Like quills upon the fearful porpentine.
But this eternal blazon must not be
To ears of flesh and blood. List, list, O, list!
If thou didst ever thy dear father love—

Hamlet:
O God!

Ghost:
Revenge his foul and most unnatural murder.
--------------------
In these lines the ghost introduces itself to Hamlet as the spirit of his father (shocks Hamlet) and then asks for his son's commitment to revenge his murder. Once Hamlet accepts the call (text not given above), the ghost remarks:
Duller shouldst thou be than the fat weed
That roots itself in ease on Lethe wharf,
Wouldst thou not stir in this.
Essentially saying something is would be wrong with Hamlet if he didn't get riled up about the situation, and the presence of his father's apparition.
-------------------------
The fact that the ghost is seen by the guards, and then Horatio -- who is said to be scholarly -- is enough to convince Hamlet of the apparition's existence. When the ghost is directly introduced to the reader as it speaks to Hamlet (we hear it with him), the existence of apparitions are validated within the world of the play, and possibly implied by Shakespeare in his own world. However, in modern times many are skeptic of whether ghosts exist ( I don't believe in them) . . . so what would happen if the most characteristic figure of the play (in the sense that Hamlet is one of the most notorious ghost stories) -- the one who sets the 'call', and starts the action -- doesn't actually exists? To answer that question, there would be no play -- and to a degree, there lies the joke of the third strip, where I have Horatio dress up as King Hamlet's Ghost as a joke (invalidating the existence of ghosts). The fact that it is a prank between best friends, over the serious conflict of the actual play (murdered father), heightens the punchline.
=============================
Process
The line work for this comic only took 64 layers to complete -- a significantly less amount than the other two, since my familiarity with the program increases with each comic I make. At this point, the style seems to have [fully] developed (you can see that the first comic looks a little different than the others).

Some choices I made:
- Elsinore Castle was modeled after the ghost scene in Mel Gibson's Hamlet
- some lines from the ghost's dialogue had to be cut, in order to neatly fit in the frame
- first comic where I added new text (necessary for the punchline)
- Horatio is the one under the white sheet, as the joke contradicts his "scholarly" nature
- The ghost is originally cut off after he says "If thou didst ever thy dear father love—" by Hamlet saying "O God." I keep the same break, but replace it with Hamlet asking the ghost if it is Horatio dressed up.

Basis and Process for Comic #2

Act 5, Scene 1, Lines 74-78

Hamlet:
That skull had a tongue in it and could sing once. How the
knave jowls it to the ground, as if it were Cain's jawbone,
that did the first murder! It might be the pate of a politician,
which this ass now o'er-offices, one that would circumvent
God, might it not?

Hamlet is irritated by the graveyard for mishandling a skull that could belong to an important figure.
-------------
Lines 176-187
Hamlet:
Let me see. (He takes the skull) Alas, poor Yorick. I knew him,
Horatio, a fellow of infinite jest, of most excellent fancy.
He hath borne me on his back a thousand times, and now,
how abhorred in my imagination it is! My gorge rises at it.
Here hung those lips that I have kissed I know not how oft.
Where be your gibes now? Your gambols? Your songs?
Your flashes of merriment that were wont to set the table on
a roar? Not one now to mock your own grinning? Quite
chapfallen? Now get you to my lady's chamber and tell her,
let her paint an inch thick, to this favor she must come.
Make her laugh at that.—Prithee, Horatio, tell me one
thing.

Hamlet speaks directly to Yoric's skull, and is conflicted at how someone once full of life is now decayed, and static -- he undergoes a revelation.
------------------------------------
Lines 197-206
Hamlet:
No, faith, not a jot; but to follow him thither with modesty
enough, and likelihood to lead it. As thus: Alexander died
Alexander was buried, Alexander returneth to dust. The
dust is earth, of earth we make loam, and why of that loam,
whereto he was converted, might they not stop a beer-barrel?
Imperious Caesar, dead and turned to clay,
Might stop a hole to keep the wind away.
O, that that earth, which kept the world in awe,
Should patch a wall t'expel the winter's flaw!

Hamlet marvels at the fact that all people -- even great conquerors -- turn to dust in the end. At the beginning of the scene Hamlet was irritated by the gravedigger's mishandling of a skull, but now asks 'why can't/what's to stop Ceasar's dust from being used to fill a whole?'
--------------------------------------------------------------
Facing eye to eye with the skull of an old friend clearly jolts Hamlet's philosophy and further feeds his preoccupation with death. Hamlet begins the scene uneasy about the gravedigger's handling of the skulls, as well as his cheerful disposition in the graveyard. When he at last recognizes the skull in the gravediggers hands as belonging to Yoric, Hamlet voluntarily pics it up, gazes into its eyes, and begins to speak directly to it.

I browsed youtube for act 5 scene 1, and in every movie it just has Horatio and the gravedigger idly standing while Hamlet speaks to a skull . . . therefor one of the jokes in this comic is the awkwardness of having to stand next to Hamlet during his grim revelation: everyone turns to dust in the end . With that said, the second joke in the comic is an exaggeration of what Hamlet saw/thought at the time -- a mix between memories of Yoric, and the physical characteristics of death in his hands. The skull is a photograph rather than a cartoon to emphasize the physicality of death hamlet is exposed to; the jester hat only appears through his eyes as a result of his memories (also makes him seem crazy).
=============================
Process

Below is an image of the line work for this cartoon, which took 83 layers to complete. This picture is not of the final #2 -- I re-arranged the order horizontally (as well as for the first comic), because I felt it carried better.
Some choices I made:
- Hamlet appears the same, and for the same reasons as strip 1
- I photoshoped an image of a skull, and a jester hat to combine what hamlet saw/thought: memories of Yoric mixed with the physicality of death siting in his palm
- only Hamlet sees the jester's hat
- the graveyard is based off of the one in Laurence Olivier's Hamlet (film)
- Horatio and the gravedigger are drawn how I imagined them while reading

Basis and Process for Comic #1

Act 5, Scene 2, Lines 280-285

LAERTES

He is justly served;
It is a poison tempered by himself.
Exchange forgiveness with me, noble Hamlet.
Mine and my father's death come not upon thee,
Nor thine on me. (He dies)

HAMLET

Heaven make thee free of it! I follow thee.

--------------------------------------
"Redemption is a religious concept referring to forgiveness or absolution for past sins and protection from eternal damnation"
- wikipedia.com
--------------------------------------
In these lines Laertes forgives Hamlet for killing him and his father, essentially offering to Hamlet, the Christian [and Islamic] principle of redemption. Likewise, Hamlet forgives Laertes for poisoning him. As Laertes dies, Hamlet pronounces that he will follow him in to heaven.
--------------------------------------
After Hamlet's long anticipated act of revenge -- where he not only kills Claudius, but also Laertes (lets not forget Poloneous earlier on) -- Shakespeare wipes the slate clean in just five lines. . . so I ask the question: what if they still went to hell?
=============================
Process
*overall I underestimated the time it would take make to create a web comic (its been a looong time since I last used Flash MX). Below is an image of the line work for the first cartoon, which took me 99 layers to complete -- though I could have sacrificed the aesthetic quality to create more comics, part of my goal in making a web comic was to connect Hamlet to a modern audience, and appearence is of importance to colorfully catch a reader's attention. Though stick figure hamlet (http://stickfigurehamlet.com/act4/scene4/page01.html) is ammusing, its simplicity can not carry readers the entire 80 strips (though it would be difficult to make that many had he done it more detailed).


Some choices I made:
-Hamlet's hair is disheveled, has a 5 0'clock shadow, and he wears all black to accentuate his melancholy persona.
-Laertes was given a mustache after the Laertes in Kenneth Branagh's Hamlet (film)
-that is Claudius in the last frame (thought it makes it funnier to have him pop up and say hello); he too is modeled similarly after the Claudius in Kenneth Branagh's Hamlet.
-the palace is based on how I pictured it when reading the play (very brown and red)
-Laertes has been hit three times, and Hamlet once -- just like in the play

List of Death/Afterlife/Character belief related content

- laertes and hamlet forgive each other at the end (retribution)
- hamlet with yoric's skull ('everyone turns to dust in the end')
- Gravedigger's reluctance to dig ophelia's grave due to suicide (christian burial) -- water analogy
-priest's conversation with Laertes about burial rituals; says if it weren't for the king, she'd be burried outside the church graveyard. Laertes claims his sister was pure.
- ghost; acknowledged by the living, therefor apparitions are validated within the play; talks of purgatory
-Horatio warning hamlet not to fight laertes; hamlet asserts that faith guides him (protestant principle)
-Hamlet's indecision about suicide; to be or not to be soliloquy
-Ophelia escapes through death
-Claudius praying -- chooses his current riches/power over going to heaven; never asks for forgiveness.
-hamlet as a martyr figure/christ figure; "The final words of Jesus ("It is finished") and Hamlet ("The rest is silence") are similar, and Horatio beckons the angels to carry Hamlet."
-Gertrude unable to see the ghost
- Hamlet justifying the murder of polonius as an act of god (further indicating his belief in fate/destiny -- a protestant principle)
- general belief of the characters that murder is the ultimate form of revenge
- announcement of one's own death in the play, "oh I am slain" -- polonius
- lack of remorse for committing murder

Hamlet Proposals

Actual project is the web comic medium of #2 with an intent/message similar to proposal #1: to provide satire or commentary on embedded philosophies about death and the afterlife, in the play -- as well as on individual characters' own revelations and views pertaining to the same. The web comic medium is intended to connect Hamlet with a modern audience across the heavily trafficked world wide web. With the use of the original text (fair amount), this project orients itself more toward the group [that was mentioned in my Hamlet on the Web essay,] more fluent in Elizabethan English.
----------------------------------
Proposal #1: a critical essay which focuses on Hamlet’s contribution to philosophical/religious discussion, in Shakespeare’s, and our own time. Specifically, I will be looking at how the audience’s interest in Hamlet’s addressing of the afterlife, has shifted from a religious standpoint to philosophical one. Shakespeare builds the plot on/has the character’s abide by both Catholic and Protestant beliefs (ghost talks of purgatory, while Hamlet states God controls everything before his duel with Laertes); the play was written not too long after the English Reformation, where the Church of England broke away from the Roman Catholic Church, partially influenced by the Protestant Reformation. Today’s audiences – long after the Christian Reformations, and with a growing number of atheists, and agnostics – look to the play for answers/stimulus to their own questions about the afterlife. The diversity that Shakespeare instilled into his characters is what makes the play so appealing to them: Ophelia sees the afterlife as an escape from her misery, Claudius decides his present state of “inherited” power is of greater importance than his well being in the afterlife (therefor does not ask for forgiveness), and Hamlet is balanced in between – uncertain of whether to commit suicide, or to continue to avenge his father’s death, risking his own damnation (kills Polonius and Laertes, and has Rosencrantz and Guildenstern killed).

Proposal #2 (Similar subject matter as the above: religion/afterlife): a web comic which depicts alternative versions of a scene, structured around the beliefs of other philosophies/religions (not Catholic or Protestant). Which scene and what religions has yet to be determined, although the scene would have to deal with the afterlife (encounter with the ghost, Yorick’s grave, the ending, etc. – one of those). There would be a total of 7 strips – one for every day of the week. I was browsing for “Hamlet comic strip” to see if it had been done before, and came across Stick Figure Hamlet (http://stickfigurehamlet.com/act1/scene2/page01.html). It covers the entire play in 80 pages (that’s a lot), so I wanted to do something different/more focused.

Romeo and Juliet Review

Theater Gets By

Before analyzing the underlying intentions of the Shakespeare Theatre Company’s production of Romeo and Juliet, it is necessary to define exactly whom the company wanted to attract to the play, and for what overall tangible goal. Based off of my personal experience watching the play (I found it easy to digest), I would say that the company desires to attract an audience with a novice, or intermediate knowledge of Shakespeare’s work (which I myself hold). Such a large target group is necessary to fulfil the goal of any artist(s) – to stay in business – and in this particularly case, to compete with the modern medium of a cinema (modern in respect to live theater). In order to appeal to such an audience, the production has to do, and in fact intends to do, these three things: dispel the misconception that a play is more restrictive than a movie, engage the audience as part of the story (most effective when done live), and assist those who express difficulty understanding Shakespearean language/dialogue.

In terms of restrictions for a play, one generally questions how a production can accommodate for a large amount of scenery, in only one fixed location – the stage area. The Shakespeare Theatre Company’s production not only answers that question, but also attempts to demonstrate how few props are actually needed to portray a recognizable setting. Aside from providing a balcony, the stage itself does not convey a specific environment, as its design is artistically abstract. Therefor, the company utilizes lighting to establish the time of day, and a vague location – which a minimal amount of props help to define. To give an example: for the night scenes, the background lighting is tinted a deep blue to create the illusion of a moonlit sky; in the foreground of the stage, several small, yellow lights are lowered down from the ceiling to represent stars. From this arrangement alone, one is able to deduce that the scene is taking place somewhere outdoors, and during the night. With the additional presence of only four flower pots on the stage, and a fully lit balcony above, it becomes clear that the scene occurs in the garden below Juliet’s bedroom. The play’s simplicity mainly derives from the company’s recycling of these props [as well as others throughout the various acts]. The yellow stage lights are reused to represent candles in the final scene, and since a dungeon is an unnatural location for a balcony, it ceases to be illuminated. In addition, the flower pots below Juliet’s bedroom are double sided: they are flipped to the flower side only after being used in the previous ‘Caputlet party scene’, as indoor decorations.

A minimal, yet creative approach to the setting, is just one of many ways the production engages the audience’s imagination. At times in the play, the stage extends into the audience’s realm, as actors occasionally enter and exit using aisles situated in the ground floor seating. Actors also directly address the audience during certain monologues, and musical scenes. There are even moments when the performers pause for laughter, a sign that they recognize the audience’s presence; one such occurrence was when Juliet anxiously shouted, “what say Romeo!” Furthermore, there exists a pattern in the structure of the play, that prevents the performance from becoming dull: the play begins and ends with all the actors on stage reciting their lines in unity; the scene transitions are more often than not accompanied by music (three minstrels), and the acts typically open with song and dance. As a result, the changing of scenes can go unnoticed, since ensembles cleverly disguised as servants, rearrange the props while the audience fixates on the music/dancing. The production clearly does not want to disrupt the audience’s imagination, and thus incorporates the changing of the set as part of the play. Lastly, there is a three-dimensional aspect to the production, that a film cannot replicate (for the obvious reason that it’s live). Actors engage with various fixtures on the set, and pace, run, or roll back and forth between the foreground and the background (creates depth). Mercutio, for example, constantly swings on the metals bars that are fastened on the stage walls; this also helps to convey his energetic, mischievous character.

Body language is not only used by the performers to accentuate character personality, but also to cue those in the audience who have difficulty understanding Elizabethan English, when a joke is being told. The best such example is in the opening scene of the play, where two servants of the Capulet family exchange sexual puns about ‘conquering’ Montahue women. To ensure that the audience reacts to the jokes, one of the servants enacts his pun by ‘riding’ a barrel; later in the play, Mercutio mocks Romeo’s love for Juliet by pretending to orally pleasure him. Such gestures seem fairly modern, but if not, there are still various other minute adaptions in the story/plot – like Tybalt’s death. I had forgotten how he originally dies (stabbed), so when I found his drowning was an adaption, I became intrigued as to why this choice was made. Overall, the play stays true to the text, allowing for even Shakespearean experts to enjoy the performance. More important, this is an indication that the company intends to educate, as well as entertain, those with a novice familiarity of Shakespeare’s work. The production is indeed successful in achieving its goals, especially in denouncing misconceptions about plays, and I am glad to see that an entertainment medium has gone on for so long.

Heavy Metal Hamlet

Ok, so it's obvious they're joking around, but there actually does exist a thoughtfully composed metal album that 'summarizes' each scene of the play with an individual track. Though I'm not a big fan of metal, the musicians and producer should be acknowledged for their effort to creative a new and unique approach to the play.

"William Shakespeare's Hamlet is an album by Brazilian band Hamlet released in 2001. It was a one-time project sponsored by Die Hard Records involving many musicians, including guest Andre Matos."

"Track listing

1. "From Hades to Earth" - Delpht
2. "Sweet Flavour of Justification" - Santarem
3. "The Happiness of the Queen" (Voice Vignette)
4. "Visions of the Beyond" - Hammer of the Gods
5. "Villainy" (Flute Vignette)
6. "The King's Return" - Krusader
7. "The Truth Appears" - Nervochaos
8. "The Play" (Guitar Vignette)
9. "A Letter to Ophelia" - Vers'Over
10. "Dagger of Worlds" - Sagga
11. "Prayers in the Wind" - Imago Mortis
12. "Stormy Nights" - Symbols
13. "Hands of Fury" (Keyboard Vignette)
14. "Hidden by Shadows" - Hangar
15. "Mandate for Freedom" - Torture Squad
16. "Trap" - Fates Prophecy
17. "Cood by my Dear Ophelia" - Eterna
18. "The Last Wolds" - Tuatha de Danann
19. "To Be" - All previous singers plus André Matos"

Track Number Four


The lyrics of this particular track focus on the moment Hamlet first encounters his father's apparition:
http://www.angelfire.com/trek/hmlyrics/hamlet/hammer.htm

More info on the making of the album:
http://www.metal-rules.com/review/viewreview.php?band=Various+Artists&album=William+Shakespeare%60s+Hamlet

Romeo and Juliet Play

I had several questions pertaining to how a set could be transformed during a live play (modern and Elizabethan), and just how elaborate they could be. The Romeo and Juliet play really helped to fill me in, as I have never been to a professional theater's play before.

To briefly list what I observed:
- lighting had a huge role in establishing the setting
- there were lights that controlled the color of the backdrop (behind the stage), lights for the balcony, lights for the front of the stage, and even dozens of little lights that could be raised and lowered to represent stars and candles.
-for night scenes: the backdrop lighting was dark blue, the stage lights were cut, and the main source of light came from the balcony and the 'star/candle' lights.
-for the dungeon the backdrop lighting was made green, while the main source of light came again from the candle/star lights
-there was a really neat silhouetted pattern created by the lighting during some of the musical scenes
- I can go on and on about how the lights were changed to accommodate each setting.

- cleverly disguised servants were used to remove and add props to the set as the scenes changed
-since music often accompanied at the opening of a new act, I was too busy observing the musicians to even notice the sets being changed.
-overall, the changing of the set was creatively incorporated as part of the play

-though the stage was a fixed structure, the actors made great use of what it provided, often climbing on bars, lying on sculptures, and tripping down the steps.
-the painting/design of the set was very aesthetic
-I was impressed at the dungeon door that was lowered in the final act; I did not even consider that there was one built inside the set, ready to be lowered.

Aside from the lighting, I think that everything done in this play (pertaining to the set) could have been achieved during the Elizabethan era as well.

Where Is Everyone?

A castle isn’t occupied by just a King and Queen. There have to be guards, servants, cooks, guests, etc., yet Shakespeare only mentions three in the opening act. I suppose it’s all implied, but I would still like to know what Shakespeare envisioned the setting of Hamlet to look like, and how much of a role he had in the actual designing of the set (I’ve found descriptions of the Globe Theater’s layout, but not of what Shakespeare’s sets looked like). Did he intend the fictional Elsinore to be viewed/imagined exactly like Kronborg Castle, in Helsingor, Denmark?

To take a guess, I would say he kept his sets minimal, since that is how most modern play adaptions are. Modern movie adaptions on the other hand, place great detail into set design, so perhaps it’s just a matter of what the medium allows for (changing the background for every scene during a live performance seems like a daunting task). I’ve only been able to find one film adaption that keeps the set minimal, and that is the 1969 British adaption by director Tony Richardson.



“a small budget and a very minimalist set, consisting of Renaissance fixtures and costumes in a dark, shadowed space. A brick tunnel is used for the scenes on the battlements. The Ghost of Hamlet's father is represented only by a light shining on the observers.”

Hamlet on the Web

Language Spins Hamlet Into Two Webs

After surveying the internet for Hamlet related content, I have reached the conclusion that the play is polarly situated in the culture of the world wide web, between those who understand its language, and those who don’t. When I started my search, I initially employed the immediacy of popular engines, such as Yahoo! and Google, and expected my basic queries for ‘hamlet’, ‘hamlet blog’, and ‘hamlet on the web’ to yield a fair amount of interesting results. What the engines actually came up with frustrated me; the first couple of result pages were filled with links (in order of occurrence) to Hamlet study guides, movie synopses, teaching guides, link collecting sites, blogs dealing with show reviews, and dead blog domains; thehamletweblog.blogspot.com was one of the few working blog links on the first page of various engines’ results, so I have a hunch it will be cited in other papers. If engines are intended to display the most relevant and useful links for queries, then does that mean that the majority of people only seek out links to “short cuts” and summaries when they search for Hamlet? This seems likely, as students account for a large percentage of internet users. However, that is not to say that all guide/summary sites market themselves as a substitute for studying the text, or even that they lack original interpretations of the play. With that in mind, I categorize a very large portion of Hamlet’s internet presence, as content that relates to simplifying the play for those who are willing, unwilling, or unable to understand its language.

It makes no difference whether one types hamlet.org or shakespeare.com into the address bar, both urls redirect to sections of enotes.com; this means that enotes bought/registered ownership of those domains for the likely reason of drawing more people to their summaries. I guess I was expecting to find from such a distinctive url, a fan site or forum that offered multiple interpretations, rather than a spoon-fed analysis. Another guide site that caught my attention was sparknotes.com, with its distinctive No Fear Shakespeare section. Although no site that wants to be taken seriously would openly market itself as a substitute for studying the text, such a purpose comes to mind from that specific title. For certain, the sites own description of the section, “No Fear Shakespeare puts Shakespeare's language side-by-side with a translation into modern English – the kind of English people actually speak today,” attests to the fact that the internet provides readers with more than just the original dialogue that many struggle with. One Hamlet study site that makes a conscious effort not to spoon feed an analysis, is Pathguy.com. I only discovered its url after expanding my search beyond the initial engine recommended links. The site provides at least two dozen images of Hamlet in art and cinema to accompany the text, and explains how to go approach the play, rather than dictating an analysis – “to discern an author's intent, look for material that does not specifically advance the plot, typify the genre, or have strong mass-audience appeal.” In addition, Pathguy.com immediately addresses the initial “difficulties posed by the language,” but does not encourage one to avoid them, assuring that “once you get past [them], you'll probably enjoy Hamlet, and not just for its action.” The internet is not just a place for students to better understand Hamlet, but teachers as well. I stumbled across sites such as teachwithmovies.org and teachervision.fen.com, which share methods of teaching Hamlet, and claim that its “message about the moral and practical pitfalls of revenge . . . maximizes [its] relevance to teenagers.”

Though all of the sources I have cited so far direct their focus on analyzing the tragic implications of Hamlet, there are still sites to be found on the web that pay attention to the more ‘concealed’ aspects of the play – specifically the humor. Clicknotes.com is one such site that contains an advanced section (in addition to its summary of scenes), where you can find explanations for every pun and paradox that Hamlet recites. Rather than being an all around, school oriented study site, clicknotes is specifically dedicated to works of Shakespeare; I’ve noticed that these types of web sites tend to be less appealing in design, and therefore there is a tendency to overlook them. In addition to offering insight about the humor in play (for those who know where to search), the internet enables those familiar with the text to share their own jokes/satires about the play. More often than not, the jokes acknowledge the difficulties of comprehending Elizabethan English, and therefore require one to have undergone the experience of reading/analyzing the original text to fully appreciate them. I had to surf through several links until I found Fox in Socks, Prince of Denmark (www.seuss.org/seuss/seuss.shakes.html), a rewriting of the play that fuses together the writing styles of Dr. Seuss and Shakespeare. The end result is harder to follow than Elizabethan English, but very fun to read – “O that these too too solid six sick bricks would tick, thaw and resolve these six sick chicks which tock.” Green Eggs and Hamlet, is yet another rewrite I came across that does basically the same thing (www.netfunny.com/rhf/jokes/97/May/geandh.html) – “Could I, should I end this strife? Should I jump out of a plane? Or throw myself before a train?” To me it seems as though there are those people who desperately want to avoid confronting Shakespearean language, and then an even fewer number of people who are glad they did, and now can share their interpretations and experiences of the play with others over the web.

Hamlet and Facebook

Even Hamlet appears to have found a small niche in Facebook’s popularizing social network. Though there weren’t many results after querying ‘hamlet’ into the Facebook search bar, what I did find [some] gives insight on highschool/college students’ reception of the play.

There are at least a dozen groups with Hamlet in the title, but most were created to review/advertise a specific modern [play] adaption of the story. Only two groups are oriented toward discussion: Hamlet = <3, which has 526 members, and Hamlet: The Elizabethan Emo, which has 292. From these small numbers, one could derive that students don’t discuss Hamlet outside of class, or just not over Facebook. After browsing through both groups’ discussion board, it seems that members of the groups (students) enjoyed reading the play for its humor, rather than Hamlet’s angst nature, which some say (teachers) they will relate to. Well maybe on a subconscious level, as Hamlet’s angst is what they find funny:

I was reading the line from Hamlet describing his misery and laughing at how poetically Bill was describing the Prince of Denmark's emo qualities, and I decided to point it out to the world through a Facebook group.

I've been advocating a reading of the play with Hamlet the angsty teenager who feels OMG so misunderstood 'cause his mum's remarried and his girlfriend hates him.

I thought it was funny

As for reception of modern adaptions, there seems to be a 50/50 split between Kenneth Branagh’s portrayal of Hamlet, and Mel Gibson’s.

Here is one person’s review of all the adaptions they’ve watched:

Mel Gibson:
Hated it. Too much of an Oedipan approach and too much skipping of important scenes. This movie dates from his action-hero-era and I think it shows. He's too aggressive, not at all troubled or brooding.

Derek Jacobi:
Didn't like it too much. I liked Gertrude a lot, but Ophelia was a bit TOO frail, and Derek Jacobi overdid it.

Kenneth Branagh:
I loved him. The mirroring of him to Claudius(Derek Jacobi, who I DID adore in this film) was very smart and the entire movie has this complete and grand feel to it. Kate Winslet as Ophelia was a stroke of genius. Also the rest of the cast is very convincing.

Ethan Hawke:
Very convincing in the 2000 Michael Almereyda film. The play is moved to our own era, consumer society, and Denmark becomes the Denmark Corporation.
A lot of cutting, that much is true, but a very very clever approach. Hawke is brilliant, as is Julia Stiles (Ophelia) and Bill Murray (Polonius).

Richard Burton:
Watching that one now, and I think this Hamlet will be my favourite!

X Hamlet

After Tyson raised the question in class today as to whether there exists Hamlet porn, I just had to find out for myself (for the sake of humor!). To be honest, I already knew the answer -- no, not because I've seen it, but because the internet simply has everything.

After one Google query I came up with:

From the pages, never read before of Shakespeare's masterpiece, here it is the other side of Hamlet, the most famous prince of literature. You must absolutely watch this great movie- an unusual mix of humor and eroticism.

(http://xploitedcinema.com/catalog/x-hamlet-p-5559.html)

I wonder how the Elizabethans would have reacted to this modern adaption of the play; if they were truly as embracing of human sexuality as historically attributed, maybe this film is right up their alley (along with overly enthusiastic Shakespeare fans).

Based off of the cover, it appears as though the director wants to focus on the background story of Ophelia's and Hamlet's relationship. . . judging from the back cover, it looks as though he agrees with Freud's analysis of Hamlet. . .

Hamlet on the Metro

Where one reads Hamlet has a large impact on how they absorb the text, and weigh its importance/relevance to the present day. Attempting to read Shakespeare on a train, I found myself lethargic to continue reading after only a few lines. To me, the play seemed irrelevant when I was in an environment of busy, anxious commuters whose focus was on modern woes [like the economy affecting their business]. I did some eavesdropping (hard not to on a train) to see if any conversations reflected the themes of the play – they didn’t. When I read the play alone in a peaceful environment however, I am able to absorb the text with great imagination – acting out the scenes in my head.

(Photo shopped by myself)

Hamlet Meets Dr. Phil

The Dr. Phil Show: Hamlet Edition [which had students act as though they were their assigned Hamlet characters on the Dr. Phil Show], was a very creative and effective exercise for analyzing the characters of the play – both for the participants and the audience. Since the exercise was unrehearsed, it required the participants (at least myself) to reflect back to the autobiographies [that addressed their character’s actions/motives], in order to quickly mold into character themselves; I was surprised at the immediacy of some of the responses to Dr. Phil’s questions. It was also interesting to see some of the interpretations of the characters, and how participants transformed into them (Aris did a good job). At some points during the exercise I actually started to believe some of the things that were said, as though I had recently experienced them. I think that one of the goals of this exercise was to connect the plot and motives to the present day – it really seemed like the sort of thing that would end up on Dr. Phil or Jerry Springer. By seeing a modern connection, I think it also helped students to overcome the language barrier (more so grammar/syntax) they may have encountered while reading the play itself. In addition, the exercise allowed students to ask the characters in person, anything they were uncertain of in the play, as though they were an actual audience on the set of Dr. Phil.

(Photo shopped by myself)

Gertrude Autobiography

For the Well-Being of Denmark

There is no uncertainty over the grief I feel for the death of my beloved husband – the cherished guardian of Denmark – great King Hamlet. I doubt that there exists on this earth, a soul resistant to the pain of losing a loved one, especially after four decades of devotion and interdependence. In the weeks following his death, I have wept more than I have in the entirety of my life. I do so however, in secrecy; each day I withdraw to the confines of my dark chamber, in an attempt to find peace within myself – if only for an hour. I must appear resilient on the exterior, as I do not want my actions to affect the fragile soul of my son. He appears to be in much greater pain than I, over his father’s passing. My recollection of the days of my husband’s courtship has grown stronger as a result of this mysterious tragedy; I suppose one searches their past to find answers for the unexplainable events they encounter in the present.

My father, being duke of the northern territory [which borders our enemies], and my mother, being the daughter of a wealthy nobleman and patron to the royal family, yielded me exclusive access to Elsinore. My parents were often called upon by the king to discuss issues of diplomacy and finance, and usually brought me along to interact with the king’s two sons. My first visit of this sort was at the age of fourteen – Hamlet was nineteen, and Claudius was sixteen. I admit without shame that I was initially drawn toward Claudius, who I found to be the more attractive of the two princes. Alas, I was oblivious to the fact that my parents were discussing more than just politics with the King. Two short years after my first visit to Elsinore, I married Hamlet as part of an arrangement intended to uphold the traditions of the kingdom. I was hurled into the public’s eye after an elaborate wedding ceremony, which drew a crowd numbered in the thousands, from all over Europe. Adapting to the publicity was no where near as daunting a task as having to confront my insecurities over the durability of my marriage. Nonetheless, I sought to become the most supportive wife I could be. In the early years of my marriage to Hamlet, I closely observed his habits in search of ways to appease him. He was always by his father’s side, offering his advice on primarily domestic issues. It became apparent to me that Hamlet was devoted to one cause: the well-being of his people. From that realization, my love for him emerged. He was ready when it inevitably came time for him to rule, and the noble people of Denmark embraced their new king and queen.

From what I have revealed thus far, it may have become apparent as to why I have remarried so soon after my husband’s death, and of all people, to his brother. As much as it pains me to be under my son’s contempt – which I highly suspect I am – a kingdom needs a king, and a son needs the love of a father. In Claudius, I see many favorable attributes that Hamlet possessed, and therefor he is a suitable role model for young Hamlet. Being so close in kin to King Hamlet as well, I am confident that the people’s morale will be restored as they renew their faith into the ever capable King Claudius. It would be dishonest of me to say that I have no personal needs that my new marriage attends to; I have longed for the experience of finding love on my own. Though I deeply bestowed my affection to King Hamlet, there exists within me, resentment toward my parents for arranging any aspect of my life. However, I am hesitant to move toward an intimate relationship with Claudius, for it would result in the attention I shed onto my son to be displaced. In doing so, I fear I would forever crush his spirit – I am not capable of living with such guilt. I hope for Ophelia to marry my son, so that she may look after him, and give him the love that I struggle to provide – the love that he deserves. She reminds me very much of me at her age. Long after Claudius and I are gone from this earth, hopefully reunited with our adorned King Hamlet, I want there to remain a stable Denmark whose people embrace their king and queen. When that day comes, my son will be ready to lead as earnestly as his father and uncle. Truly, the well-being of those around us is what matters most.

Animaniacs Language Satire

In analyzing Shakespeare, the biggest obstacle for me has always been the language. I guess many people can agree, or at least children and adolescence, since a satire on Shakespearean dialogue was included in an episode of Animaniacs - a cartoon show I watched as I kid. It’s funny how I never [consciously] picked up on the cleverness of the show, but looking back I can fully understand it.


(the Yorick speech)

Cat Head Theatre (most odd)

A video I find amusing, because it shows how far some people 'stretch' Hamlet/Shakespeare.

Mordernizing Hamlet

After watching clips from Hamlet (2000) in class, my attitude toward modernizing works of Shakespeare turned unfavorable (at least for the way this film adapted the play). The combination of original Shakespearean dialogue and modern visuals slammed together two distant eras, and I found my self distracted by the juxtaposition. However, it also got me to think about the film, to the point at which I rented it . . . turns out it was just a matter of getting used to absorbing somewhat clashing visual and audio information. In fact, I think I now have a better understanding of the text, because I have seen it applied to a plausible modern scenario (makes the case that Shakespeare’s themes/plots are still relevant). There were many creative adaptions in the film that I picked up on, but to name a few that really stuck out:

- Ophelia is an amateur photographer who takes many pictures of flowers, rather than actually carrying them (you can see her darkroom in a montage video below).
- Fortinbras has an army of lawyers to aid him in his corporate takeovers (funny), rather than an army to conquest land.
- Guns are the cause of Laertes and Hamlets death (shoot each other), rather than poison tipped swords; there are also photographers watching the fight, when in the play, Horatio was the only remaining witness (2nd video below).

Watching this movie has also brought to my attention the underlying mystery of Gertrude (the character I’m doing my analysis on): whether or not she was involved in on the murder of King Hamlet. This film’s interpretation seems to suggest not, as the director has hers drink the poison wine herself when she finds out Claudius’ intentions (2nd video below).

I See . . . Structure.

Having completed Hamlet, I have now read six of Shakespeare’s plays in their entirety: [Hamlet,] Romeo and Juliet, Macbeth, King Lear, Titus Andronicus, and Othello. While the endings of these Shakespearean tragedies are by all means serious in nature, and intended to shock their audience, I could not help feeling a bit satirical as I read over the familiar, melancholy text of Shakespeare’s signature ‘murdering-poisoning-suicide-pacting’ closing act. By no means is this a bad thing. I can compare it to watching the Die Hard quadrilogy; for each sequel, you walk into the theater, find a place to sit, watch Bruce Willis beat up a few bad guys and maybe “kill” a helicopter or two, and then walk out thoroughly entertained (no disrespect to Shakespeare, who embeds much deeper meaning into his work than any of the Die Hard directors). Perhaps the audiences of the Elizabethan Era felt this way too, as they grew accustomed to Shakespeare’s writing style.
Just like modern cinema closely follows the mythic structure, so does Shakespeare follow the dramatic structure (which he impart has shaped). In the beginning there is information provided about the protagonist, his environment, and the basis of his conflict – Hamlet who resides at Elsinore castle in Denmark, is the son of the recently deceased King Hamlet, and is troubled by the sudden marriage between his uncle and mother. Then there is a rising action that further intensifies the conflict, ultimately leading to a climax – Romeo and Juliet discover that they are from feuding families, and thus marry in secrecy; Romeo is exiled from Verona, and remains unaware that Juliet has faked her death in hopes of reuniting with him. Finally, the climax falls into the conclusion, where the audience is left with the aftermath of a catastrophe to dwell on – Titus feeds to Tamora a pie which has her sons baked in it, kills her, is then himself killed by Saturninus, who is then killed by Lucius. As the only survivor, Lucius share’s his story to the public – a duel lesson in revenge for the audience of the play.
Whatever the reason may be, Shakespeare’s structure is successful in captivating audiences across many eras. But why is it that not all who attempt the dramatic structure succeed at it? Furthermore, why would one prefer one of Shakespeare’s plays over another (Titus Andronicus is my favorite), if they all share the same structure? What I have concluded, is that a proven plot structure cannot compensate for poor detail. In other words, a book/play needs to in some way (usually character development, or their environment) invoke one’s imagination and connect with their daily life. Shakespeare clearly possess the talent to do so; by assigning Hamlet a subconscious mind he not only make’s Hamlet three-dimensional (visible/imaginable), but also generates insight for readers/audience members who note similarities in their own philosophical pondering.

A few photos from an 11th grade project, where my group reenacts the [Shakespearean] ending of Titus Andronicus.

Ophelia in Art

Ophelia’s natural innocence, and compliance to her father and brother (male figures) have made her a popular symbolic subject for artists of the 19th century to portray. In Hamlet, she is often associated with flowers (sings about them when she becomes insane; a sign that her always innocence remains intact), and therefor not a single painting of her exists them. In general, artists have either focused on alluding to her psyche – such as in Henrietta Rae’s Ophelia (below), where the canvas is “split in half between light and dark [to symbolize the chasm in her mind]” – or portraying her as a victim – such as in Arthur Hugh’s Ophelia (below), where “spikes [around her head] stick out like a crown of thorns, [associating her to martyrdom].” I find it interesting that out of all the major characters in the play, Ophelia seems to be the one most commonly interpreted. Does this make her a weak or strong character?

Ophelia - by John Everett Millais (1829-1896)(most known)

Ophelia - by Arthur Hughes (1831-1915)

Ophelia - by Henrietta Rae (1859-1928)

sources:
http://www.theatrehistory.com/british/art_of_hamlet.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ophelia_(album)

First Impression

Though this is my first time reading the story of Hamlet, I am no stranger to its plot. Shakespeare immediately makes it apparent that the afterlife (particularly questioning what one would experience) will be a central theme in the play, with the appearance of an apparition in the first scene. Later on in act one, the ghost’s identity is confirmed as that of the former king [and Hamlet’s father], as it claims Claudius (his brother) murdered him as a means of inheriting the throne. At this point I am reminded of a Disney film I watched as a kid -- The Lion King. I’m sure most are familiar with the story, but to recap: in beginning of The Lion King, Simba’s father (Mufasa, the current king), is murdered by his own brother (Simba’s uncle, Scar). Mufasa’s death raises many questions for Simba, who blames the ‘accident’ on himself. Over the course of the movie, Simba develops deep criticism for his uncle’s rule, and seeks to over through him (much like Hamlet’s relationship with Claudius). As an adult, Simba is visited by the spirit of his father, who explains to him that death yields way to new life. Though the murder of a father and king, and the suspicion/criticism of a usurping uncle can be found in the plot of both The Lion King and Hamlet, I'm certain that the message of death spawning new life was a Disney adaption. Unlike Simba, it is clear that Hamlet seeks to kill his uncle for the sole purpose of revenge, rather than to better his lands -- which are exposed to an external threat as well (Fortinbras’ army; a hyena army in The Lion King). So instead of death spawning life, Shakespeare suggests that death only yields to more death. What this says, is that with a few tweaks (human role changed to animals), the plot of Hamlet has become suitable enough to be shared even with children.



Aladdin is yet another Disney film that draws from Halmet, in that both plots address the issue of love over social barriers. In Aladdin, the Sultan forbids his daughter from marrying outside of royalty, while similarly in Hamlet, Ophelia is discouraged by her father and brother from seeing Hamlet, because of his higher social standing. Overall, I can say that there is much deception in the early acts of Hamlet, that create for me a heavy anticipation to find out what will happen next. So far in the first two acts, a nephew suspects his uncle of murdering his father, a mother sends her son’s friends to spy on him, a father sends a servant to monitor his son’s behavior, and a young woman is forbidden by her father and brother from seeing her suitor -- that's a lot of plot.