Meeting with the Ghost

The conversation Hamlet has with the ghost is one of the most important events of the second act of the play. After he follows the ghost deep into the woods, Hamlet speaks with the ghost.  The ghost claims to be the soul of the late king Hamlet.  The ghost tells Hamlet of Claudius' betrayal and murder.  This meeting marks an important transition as it provides Hamlet with the motive for his actions in the following acts as well as change Hamlet's state of being.

Hamlet's meeting with the ghost can be seen as almost an internal epiphany he has by himself.  Hamlet chases the ghost into the woods.  A dark forest suggests the unknown and transitional period as well as the subconscious.  By rushing after the ghost, Hamlet is in fact rushing deeper into his own mind to garner the inner motives that he himself has in regards to Claudius and Gertrude.  This idea is also supported by the fact that Hamlet shares a name with his father, and in turn, the ghost.  This shared name makes the conversation Hamlet has with the ghost seem like a conversation with himself.  If this is true, this meeting is an epiphany that Hamlet has which changes the way he thinks about his father's death and marks the start of his revenge.  These ideas were always within Hamlet, but it was the manifestation of the ghost that pushed him towards action.

A ghost, as a symbol of disorder and the unnatural in Elizabethan, could represent the chaos within Hamlet and the rest of Denmark. Before and after the meeting with the ghost, the motif of disorder and entropy can be seen in many places.  The untimely death of King Hamlet and the unnatural marriage of Claudius and Gertrude both suggest disorder that is widespread throughout all of Denmark.  The appearance of the ghost then, could symbolize the internal chaos that is within Hamlet due to the death of his father and the remarriage of his mother.  This chaos is then manifested as a ghost as it spreads throughout all of Denmark, first through its nightly appearance to the guards, and then in its conversation with Hamlet.

Following the meeting with the ghost, Hamlet uses the chaos as a guise in order to follow through with his motives.  He acts insane so his actions are dismissed as he pries on Polonius and Claudius.  The meeting with the ghost pushes Hamlet out of grief and into the false insanity he uses to plot against Claudius.  After this point, Hamlet changes from the grieving man we saw in Act 1 into the deceiving and plotting man we see in Act 3.  This new Hamlet is trying to restore order and balance in Denmark.  The fact that he uses his appearance of insanity and madness to further his cause of order again shows the theme of illusion and reality seen in the play.

Invisible Man- Prologue

Invisible Man begins with the narrator introducing us to the concept of "invisibility".  He characterizes this invisibility as not one of physical nature, but metaphorical, as he seems almost like a "phantom" to those around him.  This "invisibility" represents the narrator's feeling of transparency and insignificance as he is unable to make a a visible or tangible impact in the world.  

The only actual event that occurs in the prologue is the narrator's conflict with the blonde man in the middle of the night.  The narrator beats the man to near his death before he realizes that the man is blind.  Like the invisibility mentioned at the start of the prologue, this blindness is also not physical, but rather metaphorical. The blonde man, like all of society, is "blind" in the sense that they are unable to see the narrator or any other blacks for anything besides their skin color.  This blindness is then not a physical disability, but a social predisposition that causes the isolation the narrator feels with the rest of society.

To the narrator, his invisibility and the blindness of others can be seen as almost an advantage.  He is able to do things and avoid repercussions as he is often overlooked.  He thinks it is his invisiblity that allowed him to avoid being punished for his assault of the blonde man or for stealing electricity.  It is almost as if his invisibility and society's blindness removes him from society and puts him on another level of existence, whether that level is above or below the rest of the world remains unknown.  Nevertheless, his isolation from society is clearly represented in the prologue as he introduces his living quarters.  He lives physically isolated and below a building full of whites.  In a physical sense, he is below society; however, his lack of blindness and ability to see the true reality of the world puts him above society in the plane of knowledge.

The basement that the narrator lives in may be the most important part of the prologue.  The idea of an abandoned basement resembles an isolated and antiquated world, forgotten in time.  When he is in his basement, he is separate from the rest of the world.  His obsession with light is incredibly revealing of how the narrator views himself.  Light connotes vision, knowledge.  The huge number of lights in his basement represents his propensity for knowledge as he is on a higher plane of reality.  However, it could also represent his struggle to define himself in a world that is unable to see him.  In this sense, his invisibility is actually a restraint that prevents the narrator from existing in the real world.  He is invisible, in that case, not only to society, but also to himself.

Hamlet: Is vs Seems

A theme in the first act of Hamlet is the contrast between seeming and being.  Shakespeare uses the two states of existence to describe the duplicity of the characters of the play.  We are introduced to Denmark following the funeral of the late King Hamlet and the wedding of Gertrude and King Claudius.  Following these events, Denmark is put in a peculiar state as the importance of appearance becomes a central point in the story.

The contrast between seeming and being can be seen most prominently in the state of Denmark itself. We are introduced to the country at first by the speech Claudius gives in scene ii.  In scene ii, Denmark seems to be in perfect order as the royal family is strong and all business is taken care of.  Under this appearance, however, the country is in disarray.  Following King Hamlet's death, Prince Hamlet, the rightful heir to the throne, does not become King.  In the Elizabethan period, an interruption in the line of succession would be considered sinful as Kings are seen as divine protectors of the country, with their lineage blessed by god to rule.  The fact that Claudius is instead king hints at the country's instability, although it may seem Denmark has a strong king.  Secondly, the royal family seems to be perfectly fine as the King and Queen are happily married and are respected by the people.  In the Elizabethan period, however, Gertrude's marriage to Claudius, her late husband's brother, is considered incestuous and also sinful.  This contrasts with the appearance of stability in their relationship and further shows the contrast between Denmark's seemingly stable government and the chaotic reality of the play.

 The next and most easily spotted occurrence of the contrast between appearance and reality is with Shakespeare's first long speech in front of the court in scene ii.  Gertrude, after seeing Hamlet still dressed in full black, tells him to stop seeming so depressed.  This provoke's Hamlet's first speech.  In the speech, Hamlet contrasts seeming and being and states the he does not only appear to be in grieve, but is.  Unlike the rest of Denmark, Hamlet remains in grieve of his father's death and fully expresses his grieve through his clothes and actions.  This is the where Shakespeare introduces the idea of appearance and reality in the play. Hamlet's speech emphasizes the contrast between him and the rest of Denmark, specifically Gertrude and Claudius.  We begin to question Gertrude's true motives as to whether she only appears to love Claudius in order to protect Denmark and Hamlet, or she actually does love Claudius and is in fact, an "incestuous beast".

This dichotomy between appearance and reality raised in Act 1 causes us to question almost every aspect of the play.  This universal possibility of a facade that characters put on forces us to analyze the play from multiple different possibilities, making multiple different interpretations possible. 

"The Forge, by Seamus Heaney"

"The Forge"
by Seamus Heaney

All I know is a door into the dark,

Outside, old axles and iron hoops rusting;

Inside, the hammered anvil's short-pitched ring,

The unpredictable fantail of sparks

Or hiss when a new shoe toughens in water.

The anvil must be somewhere in the centre,

Horned as a unicorn, at one end square,

Set there immoveable: an altar

Where he expends himself in shape and music.

Sometimes, leather aproned, hairs in his nose,

He leans out on the jamb, recalls a clatter

Of hoofs where traffic is flashing in rows;

Then grunts and goes in, with a slam and a flick

To beat real iron out, to work the bellows

In the poem "The Forge", Seamus Heaney vividly depicts the work of a blacksmith to reveal the unpredictability of art through visual and auditory imagery.  

Heaney begins the poem with uncertainty and mysteriousness.  The "dark" (Heaney 1) that is mentioned in the opening line implies that the "door" leads to the unknown.  Heaney then contrasts the outside world and the forge.  In the outside world, "old axles and iron hoops" rust.  This rust shows that time has rendered these objects obsolete.  They are but useless artifacts of the past.  Inside the forge, however, the "hammered" (3) anvil still "rings" (3).  The word "hammered" suggests that the anvil has been used often and is also a relic of the past; however, the "short-pitched ring" that emits from the anvil suggests that the anvil is still used.  This contrast between the outside world and the forge as well as the mysteriousness of the forge shows that although an artist's creations might diminish overtime, the source of his artistry remains.

Heaney then continues to add onto the mysteriousness of the forge.  The poem rarely mentions the blacksmith or the operator of the forge, but focuses on the anvil as the source of creation.  The anvil is the "centre" (5) of the forge and acts as "an altar" where the blacksmith "expends himself" to create.  It is almost as though the anvil uses the blacksmith as a medium through which it expresses itself in the form of "shape and music" while chipping away at the blacksmith little by little.  As the blacksmith creates, "unpredictable fantail of sparks" (4) fly about with each swing of his hammer.  Heaney uses the unpredictability and ephemeral nature of sparks to illustrate the lack of control the blacksmith has over his creations.  

The poem's final lines introduces the blacksmith.  The blacksmith's recollection combines images of two differing time periods, the "clatter/ Of hoofs" and "traffic flashing in rows".  This anachronistic comparison shows the changing times that the blacksmith has seen.  The contrast of the changing world with the lack of change inside the forge further adds to the lack of control the blacksmith has on his creation.  Even though the outside world is rapidly changing, the blacksmith is tethered to the forge and continues to work the anvil even though the "old axles" and "iron hoops" he creates are useless in the world.  

The lack of control the blacksmith has and the changing time adds to the power of the forge.  Like an "altar", the anvil keeps the blacksmith working religiously.  The blacksmith has no control over what he creates.  Even though the blacksmith is aware of the changing world outside of the forge, he continues to create useless artifacts and working the forge.  

Comparing Age of Innocence and "A Doll's House"

The the play "A Doll's House" and the novel Age of Innocence both depict the state of society of the current time with its rigid and patriarchal social structures.  In their respective works, Ibsen and Wharton both highlight the transformation of characters to illustrate the values of society.  While Nora and Archer both undergo journeys towards to a transformation, Nora's rebirth frees her from the rigid shackles of the metaphorical doll's house, while Archer's experience returns him to his expected role in society, revealing that individual progression can only be achieved through personal willingness and desire to break away from the accepted social values

Throughout the play "A Doll's House", Nora undergo small changes that ultimately lead to her decision to leave Torvald and the children.  Nora's transformation was driven by her own desire.  With her realization of Torvald's shallowness and inability to see past the set rules that dictate the required appearance of a family unit pushes her away from the picture-perfect family that she thought she had.  Nora concludes that she is now too far away from the idealistic appearance of the doll's house and choose to sever her ties with it instead of forcing herself back into the closed sphere of womanhood.  This destruction of their relationship and the metaphorical doll house, however, opens a path towards progress and change for both Nora and Torvald.  The winter season that the play sets in creates contrast between the harsh, cold environment outside and the safety and warmth of the doll house.  The Christmas holiday also symbolizes both the birth of Jesus Christ as well as the destruction and death of winter that allow the season of growth and fertility to follow.  This metaphysical rebirth of her surroundings mark the period of change that Nora experiences that ultimately allows her to herself change and evolve as a character.

In Age of Innocence, Archer also undergo a journey that leads him to stray away from his societal values.  While Nora's frustration with society stemmed from her denial of the facade that Torvald wanted to maintain, Archer's resentment for Old New York came from Ellen.  To Archer, Ellen was a symbol of rebellion against the qualities of his society that he deemed negative, including closed-mindedness, hypocrisy, and lack of creativity.  Even though throughout most of the novel, Archer thought he, like Ellen, was also free from these qualities, his judgement of Ellen and her past actions as well as his pity for Ned Winsett show that he embodies the hypocrisy that he so hated.  What Archer thought was honest, personal hatred of society was instead only his desire to rebel, which he then latched to Ellen as a symbol for his rebellion.  Unlike Nora, whose purpose for leaving came from her own dissatisfaction with her life, Archer embraces the values and believes of someone else.  As Ellen leaves for Europe, Archer is left without a purpose and is once again unwilling to abandon his society, which ultimately causes him to regress back to his marriage, a symbol for his imprisonment in society.

Comparison of Nora and May

The character Nora of "Doll House" and May of The Age of Innocence both embody the values of their society in the beginning of their respective work.  Both characters transform as their respective stories progress but the conclusion of their stories are different.  Both characters symbolize the extreme off innocence while simultaneously showing signs of experience that defines them.  The contrast between the facade that both characters puts up and their actual actions shows the duplicity of women in their roles in society.

Both characters appear to be innocent as we are introduced to them.  Nora, a typical housewife, seems to be the definition of cookie-cutter wife as she is playful and flirty with her husband while being totally submissive to his every whim.  In the opening act of "Doll House", Nora appears to be almost a doll that Torvald plays with as he controls every aspect of her life, including what she buys,what she eats, and how she dresses.  He also makes multiple remarks against her as a woman that she completely agrees with since as a woman, she is born with natural faults.  May was also the same when she was first introduced.  Archer points out that May is completely shaped by her up bringing and is incredibly closed minded.  Although he seemed frustrated with her naivete, Archer shows interest in taking her under his wing to teach her about the world.  Both women appear to be products of their society and innocent.  This innocence portrays the society that they live in as well as allows us to see the traditional roles of women during the time period.

Even though both characters show their innocent and naive sides in the start of their stories, it is later revealed that they are more mischievous than they appear.  In Act 2 of "Doll House", it is revealed that it is not Torvald, but rather Nora, that holds the balance of their entire fabricated reality.  She deviously goes behind Torvald's back to ensure his safety and protect the appearance of the doll house while simultaneously allows Torvald to think he is the sole defender of the house.  In later sections of The Age of Innocence, May also reveals some of her devious qualities.  It is hinted that she is aware of Archer's relationship with Ellen, which contrasts with her innocence and helplessness.  Also, May actively shields Archer away from sources of knowledge or experience that would pull Archer away from her Old New York society.  She prevents him from meeting the French tutor while the two honeymooned in Europe.  She also disclosed her pregnancy to Ellen behind Archer's back, causing Ellen to leave to Europe.  The sly and cunning sides of these two women illustrates the duplicity of women and their roles in society.  While it is socially accepted that women were part of the sphere and are helpless creatures, these two characters show that women at the period were responsible for just as much, or sometimes even more, as the men for keeping up the family appearance.

"Infant Joy", "Infant Sorrow", and Grendel

The juxtaposition of innocence and experience in William Blake’s poems “Infant Joy” and “Infant Sorrow” shows the same conflict that Grendel has in the novel Grendel.  The balance that Grendel desperately tries to find in the novel is depicted by the two poems, with each representing a different extreme.

In the poem “Infant Joy”, Blake depicts the joy that can be found in innocence.  The child in the poem, new to the world, knows nothing about its complexity.  With his lack of understanding, the infant is in a state of blissful ignorance.  Through the child’s eyes, the world is incredibly simple.  This can be seen in the repetition of words as well as the simple diction used in the poem, as opposed to “Infant Sorrow”.  In this simplicity, however, there is only “sweet joy” and “smile[s]”.

In Grendel, this blissful ignorance is represented by the human’s way of seeing the world, with the Shaper as their guide.  Man sees the world as an idealistic series of events that happen for reasons ordained by a higher power.  When looking at treachery, man sees only glory and godliness that the Shaper uses to veil the truth.  This clouded view of reality keeps man trapped in a world made of illusions but is also what causes man to continue to thrive.

On the other hand, the poem “Infant Sorrow” shows the reality of the situation.  In this poem, reality is looked upon as “the dangerous world” and the child is a “helpless, naked” creature in this dangerous world.  The idea of entrapment within and struggle against the society can be seen in the second stanza when the baby is “struggling” and “striving” against the restraints put upon him.  The hands of the father and the “swaddling bands”, things that usually represent safety and protection for a child, instead are looked upon as chains that hold the child down.  With knowledge of the world, safety is seen as restraint while life is a constant struggle between individuals and society.  

In Grendel, this idea is given to Grendel by the Dragon.  With his knowledge of the world and reality, Grendel sees the men as children chained by their ideology.  With his knowledge, Grendel is dissatisfied with his existence and sees that within their false reality, the men have happiness, something he cannot achieve.  This creates Grendel’s inner conflict as he searches for balance.  

The poems represent the two extremes that Grendel is between.  They show the effects of the lack of balance that plagues Grendel.  The ongoing inner conflict within Grendel remains unresolved at the end of the novel where Grendel’s imbalance ultimately destroys him.