First off I think it's interesting that the word "rivals" (line 13) meant partners back then.
To answer Corina's questions: Yes I think their marriage will definitely play a large role otherwise Shakespeare wouldn't have mentioned it.
There are two Fortinbras's so yes (I looked it up). I think the one mentioned at line 82 was the father and at some point Horatio starts talking about the son. I don't know I didn't understand it much either.
Although I think the King is a big adversary for Hamlet, Hamlet is really prideful as many people were back then, and lets that pride get in the way of the big picture. I feel like Fortinbras is more of a foil character, but it's a little too early to tell.
I agree with Angelina, the use of the word “rival” seemed very interesting and really shocked me. So far, I really like the play, Reading the first two scenes, I gained the sense that King Claudius should not be trusted, as I found his behavior with Hamlet’s sadness and his brother’s widow a bit strange and emphasized in the text, possibly to make a later betrayal more notable. I think that Fortinbras is probably a family name, and the son was most likely named after his father because they are two separate characters, but I find this to be interesting because I’m not quite sure yet why Shakespeare would not give them two names. Perhaps, this will be later used to emphasize contrasts/similarities? I find the ghost situation to be an omen for something bad, and I feel like when Hamlet comes to speak with it, he will be disappointed.
I didn't catch that use of "rival". How interesting. It shows how weird language was back then.
I agree that the King is definitely not a good character, and I believe like Angie that Fortinbras will be a foil in this play.
That is a great potential explanation, Natalie, about the reasoning behind the two Fortinbras's, but I guess we probably won't find out since the father Fortinbras is dead so we never meet him. Unless of course, he's a ghost too.
I also thought the use of "rival" was strange but if you think about it the essence of the word rival is not necessarily "enemy" but more "counterpart" do you agree? And I read on before I posted so I can't really make predictions perse, but I shared the same uneasiness about King Claudius and overall I think he's a bad guy, but it's more pathetic than evil, sort of like Macbeth. I think that overall this piece will be more about deciphering the grey than seeing the black and white, what do you think?
That makes a lot more sense now and a really interesting example on how the connotation can affect the meaning of a word completely. Also I completely agree especially now that I've read more of the story and see all the conflicts Hamlet faces within himself.
Do you think the whole marriage of his mother to his uncle will play a large role in the rest of the play?
ReplyDeleteIs Fortinbras both a father and a son? I got confused during the King's story about all that happened.
Who is the enemy of Hamlet? Will it be the King, Fortinbras (Norway), or Hamlet himself?
On a side note, I love the story so far. Shakespeare is awesome. I can't wait to read more!
First off I think it's interesting that the word "rivals" (line 13) meant partners back then.
ReplyDeleteTo answer Corina's questions:
Yes I think their marriage will definitely play a large role otherwise Shakespeare wouldn't have mentioned it.
There are two Fortinbras's so yes (I looked it up). I think the one mentioned at line 82 was the father and at some point Horatio starts talking about the son. I don't know I didn't understand it much either.
Although I think the King is a big adversary for Hamlet, Hamlet is really prideful as many people were back then, and lets that pride get in the way of the big picture. I feel like Fortinbras is more of a foil character, but it's a little too early to tell.
I agree with Angelina, the use of the word “rival” seemed very interesting and really shocked me. So far, I really like the play, Reading the first two scenes, I gained the sense that King Claudius should not be trusted, as I found his behavior with Hamlet’s sadness and his brother’s widow a bit strange and emphasized in the text, possibly to make a later betrayal more notable. I think that Fortinbras is probably a family name, and the son was most likely named after his father because they are two separate characters, but I find this to be interesting because I’m not quite sure yet why Shakespeare would not give them two names. Perhaps, this will be later used to emphasize contrasts/similarities? I find the ghost situation to be an omen for something bad, and I feel like when Hamlet comes to speak with it, he will be disappointed.
ReplyDeleteI didn't catch that use of "rival". How interesting. It shows how weird language was back then.
ReplyDeleteI agree that the King is definitely not a good character, and I believe like Angie that Fortinbras will be a foil in this play.
That is a great potential explanation, Natalie, about the reasoning behind the two Fortinbras's, but I guess we probably won't find out since the father Fortinbras is dead so we never meet him. Unless of course, he's a ghost too.
I also thought the use of "rival" was strange but if you think about it the essence of the word rival is not necessarily "enemy" but more "counterpart" do you agree? And I read on before I posted so I can't really make predictions perse, but I shared the same uneasiness about King Claudius and overall I think he's a bad guy, but it's more pathetic than evil, sort of like Macbeth. I think that overall this piece will be more about deciphering the grey than seeing the black and white, what do you think?
ReplyDeleteThat makes a lot more sense now and a really interesting example on how the connotation can affect the meaning of a word completely. Also I completely agree especially now that I've read more of the story and see all the conflicts Hamlet faces within himself.
ReplyDelete