Entering Heaven Through the Ear of a Raindrop

The last act of Hamlet was wonderful. In the other tragedies by Shakespeare, however, I felt much sadder while reading the plays; in Hamlet, I almost wanted the characters to die. Romeo and Juliet did not deserve to die: they were young, in love, and had done nothing wrong. This is going to sound horrible but here is my take on who deserved their deaths: Polonius, he deserved to die. The guy was trying to sabotage everyone’s lives, including his own daughter’s happiness. King Claudius, boy did he deserve to die. He was my most-hated character because of the ease and calmness he exhibited after the horrible things he had done to reach the place he was in. Queen Gertrude deserved to die; she was a horrible mother and a wretched character altogether. Although Claudius did some terrible things, I hated Gertrude because of the things she did not do. There were times when she should have stopped her husband or spoken up but just never had the guts. Anyways, Laertes did not deserve to die. The boy was only trying to defend his family’s honor by fighting Hamlet. He was depressed and saddened by his father’s and sister’s deaths. Personally I think he wanted to die. At least I think Shakespeare wanted Laertes to want to die. Shakespeare, in writing his tragedies, always kills off just about everyone, but Laertes… I don’t know, something about this character just makes me think that Shakespeare killed him off because the character wanted to die, not because Shakespeare wanted the character to die (If this makes any sense at all). So conclusion: Laertes did not deserve to die because of his motives but was the only character in this play that actually wanted to die. Now on to Hamlet. He did not deserve to die. I don’t even think he wanted to die. He was just depressed for awhile and everything was going so fast, especially with the news of Ophelia’s death, and I think he never really stopped to consider how he could make things better. I love Hamlet so maybe it’s just me wanting to see the best in him or maybe it’s me being a romantic, but I wanted so badly for him and Ophelia to stay alive. I knew, of course, that this would never happen, but if I wrote my own Act 5 of Hamlet, I would have everyone die except for Hamlet and Ophelia because I think they both loved each other, despite what either of them said in earlier parts of the play. Overall, I love this play and my only wish, although impossible, is that Hamlet and Ophelia had stayed alive long enough to tell each other how they really feel. 

Although quiet and very weak, Ophelia’s death was unexpected for me. First of all, I thought that Ophelia would kill herself. The queen claims her death was accidental but maybe she really did kill herself, who knows? It kind of reminds me of Grey’s Anatomy where Meredith tries to kill herself but it would have looked accidental. Gertrude tells the story a little weirdly if you ask me, so it’s a little hard to understand. Apparently Ophelia fell in the water and just kept on singing because she was “incapable of her own distress,” meaning she had no idea she was in great danger. That is pretty unbelievable to me. Even if Ophelia was crazy she probably would have thought, okay I’m currently unable to breathe, so I should therefore come up for air. So my hypothesis is that she killed herself ON PURPOSE. Second, Ophelia’s craziness reminds me of what Hamlet wanted to come across as while pretending to be crazy: slightly conscious but mostly out of it. Her inability to listen to anyone was actually genuine though, which is the difference between her insanity and Hamlets. The two characters are very much alike: each loses a father and is very distraught over it. The difference between them, however, is their reaction. Ophelia, being a woman, dies after quickly going crazy while Hamlet simply pretends to go crazy. Either way, Hamlet and Ophelia are alike, which may foreshadow Hamlet’s ultimate fate.

The family relationships between a parent and child in Hamlet is worthy of discussion because of the complexity shown in a character through their relationship with their family. Hamlet and his mother have a cold relationship now that she has married Hamlet’s uncle, and she only makes things worse by hypothesizing that he is insane. A mother should try to believe the best in her child and attempt to find the good in him among all of the bad. Her pessimistic idea that Hamlet is crazy and cannot come back from his insanity is shown when she and Hamlet are conversing in her closet. She says, “Have you forgot me?” I am not sure whether to think of this as a selfish inquiry as to whether or not Hamlet pays attention to his mother enough and that she is saddened by his disregard of her or as to whether or not Hamlet remembers who his mother is, and what she is to him. Either way, this statement seems a bit self-centered. Queen Gertrude should be asking Hamlet a few things: Are you okay? Are you really going crazy or are you just crying for help? Is this in retaliation of my actions? What can I do to help you? Her focus on herself is truly demonstrated once again when she says, “O Hamlet, thou hast cleft my heart in twain,” meaning she is upset that Hamlet is making her divide her heart between him and her husband. Although this is a bit touching because she is at least showing some concern for her son, Gertrude should not be alarmed that her duties as a mother are taking up her affection over her duties as wife. When I am a mother I refuse to ever let my husband steal my attention when it should be going to my child, especially if my child is supposedly going insane. Gertrude shows a horrible motherly instinct in Hamlet, and demonstrates the epitome of a bad, unconcerned mother. I am angry at her for not giving her son enough attention because even if he is past the age where he needs his mom, that should not mean that Gertrude can’t be there for him.

Act 2 of Hamlet portrays many of the characters as witty and charming, especially Hamlet. He reminds me so much of Patrick Verona (played by Heath Ledger) from 10 Things I Hate About You because he is super sarcastic and immature around people he does not like but can be serious and charming when he has to be. I know I already focused on Hamlet in my earlier post on Act 1 but I just cannot help to comment on his adorable charm. If I was Ophelia I would be all over him; his charisma is so enthralling, I absolutely love him. (He is a way better character than the cover of our book alludes to.) When he ignores Polonius or pretends to have heard something different in Scene 2 I thought he was hilarious. As Polonius is walking in, Hamlet pretends to be serious with Rosencrantz because he does not want to talk to Polonius. I love him for doing things like this. His character is so young and he reminds me so much of any normal teenager that wouldn’t want to talk to someone they don’t like, so they pretend to be having a deep conversation with someone else. Then Hamlet continues to insult Polonius by implying that his news is old and making fun of his serious comments by interrupting him with a line from a song. He is so much like Patrick Verona, which makes sense because 10 Things is actually based on Taming of the Shrew, another play by Shakespeare. Hamlet is by far my most favorite character because of his intelligent wit. Any girl would love a modern-day Hamlet because of his hilarity charm. Go Ophelia!

In Hamlet, there is a ghost of Prince Hamlet’s father lurking around the castle at night, as seen by Marcellus, Bernardo and Horatio, three guards. When Hamlet is informed of the ghost, his reaction is somewhat unbelievable. Yes, I realize his father has died and he wants him to come back because he would give anything just to see him again, but when three lowly men inform you that they have been seeing the ghost of your father, would you really be so quick to say, “For God’s love, let me hear!”? I just want to go up to him and say, “Really Hamlet, really? Do you really think these guys are actually viewing an apparition of your dead father? Are you really this quick to accept such a normally crazy-sounding claim? Are you serious right now? Really?” Personally, I would ask these guys a couple of questions. Are you sure it is not just someone playing a trick? Maybe there are animals around that you are hearing? Are you hallucinating? Are you crazy? Hamlet might be in the mourning stage but it is a bit unbelievable to me that he would accept such astonishing news by asking two questions, then replying with “‘Tis very strange.” I guess this response could be a demonstration of his character: trusting, honest and young but smart enough to suspect something when told that your father is in purgatory. Hamlet’s personality is defined by this moment because it shows his ability to get along with men outside of royalty and his genuine care and concern for other people. He is a very authentic character although somewhat too-quick-to-assume. I like him for accepting these assumed facts without much question because it shows his ability to accept people and their claims without judgment. Yes, he seems kind of stupid by immediately reacting to Horatio, Marcellus and Bernardo with such excitement, but he’s young so I guess I forgive him.

Young and Old

Seamus Heaney with Ted Hughes and Charles Causley

The Cottage Porch

You and I run ‘round the cottage

And the wet grass does not mind

That it is stomped. The other

Side, by the cars, is foreign.

                        *

I cry because I am young,

And you are younger, so you

Win. But I am older and I

Finish the puzzle by the wicker without you.

                        *

She has so many glass bottles

On the ledge of the porch, that I

Am a musician. Every bottle has

A pitch and you, my audience, applaud. Blowing

Into glass bottles is musical, so doing a cartwheel

Is sophisticated. With these talents we will

Have a circus on the Fourth of

July like last year’s sparklers.

                        *

We have by now learned to live

The right way. So we don’t run

‘Round the cottage anymore.

Instead we read our books on the wicker.

                        *

We never have enough

Cushions so I lie down with my book

And the blood flows out of

My legs. She has the stones for

Rabbits, but I paint them for her

Instead. The newspapers on the porch table

Always blow away but my stones

Never leave, even when the paint fades.

                        *

You go out there to get

Shoes, and we both

Know the ice makes it cold on the porch. So you

Come back in to do your frozen schoolwork.

                        *

Everyone is ready for her to bring out

Dinner on this humid night. The wood

Is dry, and I get a splinter in my toe.

Matt was always happier outside, too.

                        *

The outdoor chairs let the towels

Rest. You and I take two and get

The bikes. Like flowers without

Purpose, the porch, then the cottage vanish

            completely.

For this poem I mixed my favorite aspects of Seamus Heaney from my favorite poems by him. The poem Keeping Going uses first and second person while Heaney is conversing with his dead little brother, remembering his childhood with him. In the poem I am speaking to my younger sister (who is actually alive). Keeping Going uses memories to paint a detailed picture, as I tried to do in The Cottage Porch. In The Swing and A Sofa in the Forties, Heaney uses normal, everyday objects to create imagery and meaning. His ability to take something as simple as a sofa and demonstrate every use of it for children, adults and families, is inspiring and innocent. I love these two poems more than any others of Heaney’s because they show his full effort and sweat that he contributes to poems about simple, everyday things that most people would pass by, like a porch. Both poems exemplify the idea that even though something is meaningless to some people, to others it means the world, especially with all of the memories they have made with it. My poem also uses the simplicity and meaningfulness of a porch for my sister and I. In A Sofa in the Forties, Heaney also passes through time, showing the different uses of the sofa as time goes on. I tried to achieve this effect in my poem as well, chronologically going through my experiences on my cottage porch with my sister. I copied Heaney’s structure of poetry, mostly that of Keeping Going and A Sofa in the Forties, because I like the perfection of four lines per stanza and the occasional indentation for effect. My poem illustrates Heaney’s descriptive lines, structured poetry and simple yet meaningful subjects.

My experience with this Spring Research Project was almost completely positive. I successfully navigated my way around the blogosphere while learning and concluding information on my poet. My only struggle was trying to wrap my mind around the broad assignments given on the main blog. Every time I read the next blog post assignment, it took me awhile to understand exactly what I was supposed to do and how. The topics and ideas we were asked to research were so broad to me that I did not know where to start. I eventually understood the assignments, but the descriptions of the assignments were what confused me the most. Overall I found this project to be different, helpful and modern. My only suggestion is to narrow/clarify the assignments a bit more.

http://nicoleegr1.edublogs.org/2009/03/09/sylvia-plath-biography-of-a-poet/#respond

http://kelseyegr1.edublogs.org/2009/03/11/background/#comment-5

http://daveytalbot.com/?p=172#comment-27

http://philipschaefer.com/2008/11/13/ted-hughes-and-seamus-heaney-comment/comment-page-1/#comment-2336

Seamus Heaney and Ted Hughes were wonderful friends, influencing each other through life in their poetry and their passions. At Hughes’ funeral in 1998, Heaney spoke, saying that “No death in my lifetime has hurt poets more. He was a tower of tenderness and strength, a great arch under which the least of poetry’s children could enter and feel secure. His creative powers were, as Shakespeare said, still crescent.” Their friendship was so real and personal that Heaney was inspired by Hughes in his poetry. In his poem Casting and Gathering, Heaney writes:

I loved hushed air. I trust contrariness.
Years and years go past and I do not move
For I see that when one man casts, the other gathers
And then vice versa without changing sides.

His love and devotion to his friend is apparent in this sweet, genuine poem of friendship and camaraderie. Raphael Ingelbien of the University of Wisconsin, claims “the image could symbolize the bond between two imaginations that often fished in the same poetic waters.” The two poets brought together their favorite poems, including poems by Elizabeth Bishops, in an anthology/book called “The Rattle Bag.” The book has gotten wonderful reviews and Hughes and Heaney had a wonderful time collecting their favorite works. Heaney recently said that “Hughes was like a gable, a psychic gable that you could put your back to. He had a brotherly status in that way. He was important to me to begin with, to start the writing, and then that he commended the work was very important, and then I got to know him and felt – as so many, many people did – that there was an element of care for you.” His love for Hughes is expressed in his poetry, mainly Casting and Gathering, as is his value for their friendship.

The influence of T.S. Eliot on Seamus Heaney is quite remarkable. As a boy, Heaney claims he “was daunted by T. S. Eliot and all that he stood for.” Heaney was so enthralled with Eliot’s poetry that in his book “Influences: The Power of T.S. Eliot,” he states that his poetry is “the way, the truth, and the light, and that until one had found him one had not entered the kingdom of poetry.”

The Waste Land, by Eliot, taught Heaney to focus more on the sounds and rhythm of a poem rather than its theme or central idea. Heaney went so far as to hold Eliot responsible for his interpretation of poetry in saying, “the physicality of his ear as well as the fastidiousness of its discriminations, his example of a poet’s intelligence exercising itself in the activity of listening, all of this seemed to excuse my own temperamental incapacity for paraphrase and my disinclination to engage a poem’s argument and conceptual progress.” The problems Heaney was experiencing in writing poetry, Heaney concluded, were therefore unimportant in comparison to the way the poem sounded when read aloud. Eliot influenced Heaney’s focus as a poet through his lengthy, yet rhythmic poetry. In The Waste Land, Eliot uses sound to engage the reader in his fourth section of the poem. He writes:

                                    A current under sea
Picked his bones in whispers. As he rose and fell
He passed the stages of his age and youth
Entering the whirlpool.
                                    Gentile or Jew
O you who turn the wheel and look to windward,                         
Consider Phlebas, who was once handsome and tall as you.

This excerpt exhibits Eliot’s ability to use sound as an ability for writing in poetry through the rhyming and slant-rhyming of the words youth, whirlpool, Jew, and you. The poem was so profound to Heaney that he “began to construe from its undulant cadences and dissolvings and reinings-in a mimetic principle which matched or perhaps even overwhelmed any possible meaning that might be derived from the story.” The inspiration Eliot provided for Seamus Heaney was so eye-opening that he began to understand his own style of writing. “What I heard made sense,” he said. T.S. Eliot’s poetry allowed Heaney not only to realize the importance of rhyme and sound but to discover himself and his abilities. Heaney’s poetry includes rhymes similar to Eliot’s, although he focuses much more on sound, choosing to use free-verse in almost all of his poems. Nonetheless, Heaney uses sound to direct his poetry, shown in his poem Digging:

Under my window a clean rasping sound
When the spade sinks into gravelly ground:
My father, digging. I look down

The sound of the poetry is most important in this poem because it gives off a sense of warmth and admiration. Heaney, as Eliot, rhymes the words sound, ground and down to demonstrate the power sound has over a reader. Eliot’s influence on Heaney permitted him to open up and discover his approach as a poet, the most important aspect a poet must possess; a sense of self. Robert Peake, a poet and scholar at Pacific University, Oregon, says that “Eliot’s influence… on Heaney himself, could not be made more clear,” because of their connection to poet Dante. Peake claims that since Eliot influenced Dante, and Dante influenced Heaney, there are “parallels here, between Dante’s influence on Eliot, and both Dante and Eliot’s influence (as well as Dante’s influence through Eliot) on Heaney.”