Reflections...

Working with blogger was a pretty cool experience. I honestly didn't know anything about it other than its existence in the Internet world. It was pretty easy to navigate and get control over. Its kind of like a myspace type of situation where you add certain things to make it your own. I really liked that aspect of it and the fact that it wasn't hard to do. I also really liked getting feedback from my peers. When I had felt as though I had done a good job, they were always there and very complimentary towards my work. I also like that when my work was a little off, they were honest enough to oppose some of my beliefs. Writing the blogs on blogger was easy. It beats having to write numerous papers or having quizzes every other class period. Although some of the topics were more difficult than others to write about, the use of the blogger made life easier. If one read the reading material, it was not difficult to write any entries. Blogger really reminds me of the old Microsoft works, where they make everything simple and idiot-proof. The minimum of 250 words was never an issue for me. I spoke about each and every topic until i felt my points were made clearly. I just figured it would always end up being around 250 words. At times it was a little difficult to meet the deadlines. Between the chunks of reading that had to be done, we also had to work on our papers, other projects, and deal with the workload from other courses. Blogging was easy to forget to do for me because it was all done online from my house. I think the deadline should be inforced but accepted late with a certain amount of penalties due to the. The 8:00 in the morning timing I think should be done away with completely because it is a little ridiculous. Especially since we don't have class anywhere near that time. If a person were to do the majority of their blogs on time, they may deserve a few extra points added onto their lower graded blogs. I really liked being forced to leave comments on the blogs of my peers as well. it forced me to read their work which is something I probably wouldn't have done on my own. But it turned out to be really enjoyable. It was also enjoyable to see how different people interpret different things. Blogging was mucheasier and much more convient than the more traditional forms of essay writing. I feel that blogger allowes more freedom of expression that wtiting essays does not. Even the writing prompt we had to do during the first few classes were painful, even though i was keeping upwith the readings. Umm, i have no idea what in the world i would blog about outside of schoolwork. I would never post my feelings on here or anything dealing with my personal life, so, im too cool for blogging.

My Favorite Lady

In order of my favorite to my least favorite:


Judi Dench- As soon as she screamed, she won the title of my favorite lady. You can see, hear and feel the pain and the crazy she is experiencing. Initially, the way she walks right in between the other two characters catches my attention. Then, when she hold her hands up to the candle, she doesn't really examine the "blood" on them. She looks past her hands and looks crazed and extremely remorseful. When she says "hell is murky" and then looks directly at the other actors as well and into the camera and then delivers the "fie my lord fie" line, her look is penetrating. Her voice and her hand motions are so believable. Dench looks genuinely perturbed to her core and it manges to shake the viewer to the core. She seems so depressed when she delivers the "all the perfumes of Arabia line." She then rocks back and forth while sitting on the floor and that is something i can see someone who is losing their mind doing. She just comes across very believable in her techniques and really manages to deliver the emotions that needed to be portrayed for this scene.



Jane Lapotaire- Her portrayal overall seems rather manic. The way she plays the Lady does not feel as emotional or remorseful as Dench did. I like that her entrance felt ominous. Her "hell is murky" line delivery seemed a little fake. But she then compensates for it by her delivery of "who would have thought..." line. She seems shaken by that thought. She seems genuinely disgusted by the thoughts shes having. Then she begins to sing the delivery of her lines and i did not feel as though that was necessary. It enhances the belief that she is losing her mind, but i feel as though that it didn't fit into the scene. I also thought the her sniffing her hands the way she did after the "perfumes of Arabia" line was ridiculous. When she was pretending to pull Macbeth to bed, she seemed like she hasn't gone to the bathroom in a long time and was trying to push one out. Overall i don't think her performance was believable especially since she played lady Macbeth more crazed than sorry. Her remorse was meant to be hidden beneath her insanity.

Shirley Verrett- I think that the fact that this is an operatic performance, it gives the speech a totally different vibe. The acting skills in this scene are secondary to the voice of the singer. We really only have Verrett's singing to have any emotions evoked. The fact that is is a different language (even with the words in front of me) made it more complicated for me to understand. I think the singing was beautiful and it made me tear up, but i don't think it holds as strongly as Dench's performance, unless you are looking for an opera. For me, i missed the physicality of the other performances. I must admit though, they had the best staircase.

If I Could Make a Perfect Man...

The
characteristics my ideal man would possess are:

1.Sensitive 2.Caring 3. A Good Listener 4.VERY handsome but not conceited 5.Goals to further himself 6. Willful with strong moral beliefs 7.The ability to
cope in rough times 8.Strong but knows when to be gentle 9. Responsible 10.Not easily influenced by others (knows who he is and what he wants) 11.Calm, even during times when it is hard to restrain himself
I believe it is hard, speaking from a modern American standpoint, for a man like Macbeth to hold all of the characteristics I have listed. However there are several characteristic a man should have held from generation to generation.

Macbeth:
1.Sensitive- I think Macbeth is sensitive in a warped way. He doesn't kill King Duncan without remorse. He is so torn about the murder that he lets Lady Macbeth literally clean up his mess.
2.Caring- I think this goes hand in hand with sensitivity. He cared that he was a murderer and is tortures himself over the path that he chose 3.Good Listener-Obviously he is a good listener to a fault. His wife is a little nutty and suggests death as a means to obtain a goal. That was one time he probably shouldn't have listened to his Lady. He also listens too closely to what the three crazed witches have to say
4.Very Handsome but not conceited- I do not know exactly how handsome Macbeth is supposed to be. I'm sure he was to a certain degree (a powerful man is always sexy) but it is impossible to tell if he is conceited or not . 5. Willful With Strong Moral Beliefs- Willful Macbeth may be, in all the wrong ways of course, but he is obviously lacking in the morality department. He is the type of man where he believes that the end justifies the means. That makes him lack any sets of guidelines whatsoever. 6. The Ability to Cope in Rough Times- Although Macbeth outwardly acts like nothing is wrong in his life after the murder of King Duncan, he did not have that capability immediately after the murder. He reacted on instinct immediately after the murder and relied on his wife. He is also struggling internally, and eventually that will catch up with his outward actions. 7. Goals to Further Themselves- It is quite clear that Macbeth's goal is to become king with using unconventional methods. I never thought that a man with goals could be so flawed, but in Macbeth's case it is his fatal flaw. 8. Strong but Knows When to Be gentle- Macbeth is a murder, a villain no doubt, but he is a loving and gentle husband with his wife. He is a man of war that con protect his wife and family but still holds a gentle (but bloody hand). 9. Responsible- I feel that this is one trait that Macbeth lacks completely. His actions were completely irresponsible and was not the right choice for him to make. Does he own his responsibility for the terrible path he chose (which inevitably lead to his own demise)? Yes. but he does not act in any responsible form. 10. Not Easily Influenced- This is one trait that Macbeth also completely lacks in. He is not his own man. He is talked into committing an unspeakable crime and is spellbound by the idea of being king and is captivated by the witches. I wouldn't want to know what else he would be able to be talked into. 11. Calm- He is not in any way calm. He tortures himself almost daily and lets his deed completely was over him. He is not taking care of the situating he created for himself and is internally going insane. You can't blame a man that has just commited murder to be collected in his emotions or feelings, but he does almost nothing to cope and come to terms with what he has done.

Destiny is Dead in The Hand's of Bad Luck

Hamlet's fate in the play is quite clear once the reader realizes the plays plot. We have this man who is already depressed and torn apart over what he believes is his father's murder. His depression and "madness" beings to be verified to him when he speaks to his father's ghost. I believe the outcome of this is shaped both by divinity and his sometimes nonsensical course of actions. Had Hamlet's father never been murdered (divinity??) and had he never had any sort of suspicion to the death of his father like the other characters in the play (his character) there would be no course of action necessary for him to take. I believe that Shakespeare wanted to impose the belief of divinity being a means for a result simply by using a ghost as a character. In other plays he used soothsayers and other means to bring about the truth behind a matter. The fact that Hamlet speaks to his father's ghost brings about a feeling that there are bigger factors coming into play other than the bitterness Hamlet has against his uncle. However, Hamlet's constant over analytical plotting and double guessing himself brought about more harm than good it seems. His action/inaction lead to several death's that were seemingly unnecessary to help his cause (Polonius, Ophelia,etc...). The methods behind his madness did not help his master plan as much as it hindered his course of action further (although it made for great reading material). If Hamlet was not always a step ahead of everyone else and had he not had been a believer, there would be no Hamlet to begin with.

I honestly believe in the quote "Destiny is dead in the hands of bad luck". This means that divinty or destiny can only take a person so far. There is a path that is already paved for one to take but it is up to the person to choose how that path is going to turn out. The divinty aspect was a ghost appearing and speaking with Hamlet. The man's power with divinty is seen in Hamlet's choice to believe in the ghost and then follow up on the ghosts promting to avenge his death. Hamlet, when hearing his proof that his uncle is guilty of murdering his father (more divinity??), has a chance to confront him on it or wait it out. Hamlet waits it out and well, we all see how that worked out for him. It is a combination of divine power meshed with our own human instincts that lead to how things will turn out.

I feel that Hamlet truly believed he was put upon this path of destructive revenge by a higher power. He recognizes the ghost of his father to be, well, a ghost. I also think he recognizes that the choices he makes, even with the guidance of his father's ghost, played a hand in the outcome of the play. He recognizes that he is not the agent of God like he once said but just played with the hand he was dealt. I feel that "There's a divinity that shapes our ends, /Rough-hew them how we will" he is giving himself and his actions completly over to God. That this was the path god set him out on and he only being human only reacted as a human would.

Blog 8: You've Gotta Be Cruel To Be Kind in The Right Measure

Hamlet and Othello, although on a similar quest for justice, are two very different characters and are put on their paths for very different reasons. They both share a fatal flaw of needing to seek out justice by means of their own hands. However similar their goals may be, they approach the situation in very different ways. Hamlet, from the moment we meet him, is a thinker. He is very aware of the situations going on around him and is already brewing on the inside. We can see his anger and depression within the first few lines he speaks. He has been "royally screwed" by his family and is unsure of what action he should take, if any at all. Othello starts off a very calm, collective man. He is a man of war and therefor is logical, well planned, and is in full control of the situations around him. He starts off with the image of a big teddy bear. Othello is the war hero who turns to mush at the mere sight of his wife. He does not change his ways until someone else plants doubt in his mind. Hamlet had the doubt to begin with. The ghost, similarly to Iago, confirms Hamlet's worst nightmares. (Iago did this by giving Othello Desdemona's handkerchief) Both men however, waited until they had solid proof of their suspicions until they started to take action. Othello, before having his "proof" did not really put much thought into his actions. He reacted to Desdemona on the pure emotions he was feeling in the moment. One could see Othello's "in the moment" thinking when he sees Desdemona and begins questioning if he should really kill her because just by looking upon her, he falls in love all over again. It is not until Desdemona is actually dead he really knew that he was going to go through with his plans. Hamlet knew all along what action he was going to take. Timing and having the right evidence was key to the action (and sometimes inaction) Hamlet took. Due to Hamlet's precautions, he let all of his emotions brew inside of him to a point where he could no longer control them. He then, with the first taste of the release of his pent up aggression, could not "bottle the monster" back inside of him. He took on the personality of a man hellbent on evening the score. He initially did not want to ruin more people's lives than necessary, but didn't care enough at the end to stop himself. He was unapologetic in his actions even until his death. Othello on the other hand realized and admitted his own wrongdoing and was truly sorry for the actions he took. Can I really blame Hamlet for letting himself follow the path of justice he took? No. I can also see why he takes on this omnious god-like character. He is mentally a step ahead of all of the other characters in the play and knows that the end will be bloody.

Blog 6: It Was Fun While it Lasted...

I think my picture pretty much sums up what my response to this prompt is going to be. As a very strong minded, self sufficient, "miss independent" woman, reading Othello, I can't help but stop and think "What the F*ck is this woman thinking??" I have a very low tolerance for taking any kind of crap from a man. There is very little a man can do for me that I can't do for myself. Especially since I'm not looking to have any children in the near future, there is nothing a man can do for me that I can't do for myself. Yes it is nice to share love and be dedicated to one person, but what happens when that man turns on you? If a man were to ever call me a whore, tell me I was unfaithful, and belittle me just because he is insecure in himself, I would do a lot worse than just slam a few doors on my way out. Sticking around and listening to false accusations would not even be a possible option for me. If my own husband were to make the accusations, I feel like that would an even bigger betrayal . That is proof that the marriage has failed and the love has faded. If my husband loved me and didn't believe what was being said about me he would approach me in a different way than Othello approached Desdemona. If the slurs and slanders continued throughout the conversation I was attempting to have one with him, his chances of me staying in the marriage decreases. I would leave and not hesitate at all. Things may be rough for a while but I know it would be for the best if I left.

I do know that my mentality is in 2008 and women are VERY different than the women in Desdemona's time. Today women have options and are more aware of the fact that there is more than just one possible match for them. We see less arranged marriages and more freedom for women. Sadly Desdemona did not live with that luxury. For her time period and the constraints of her situation, I feel she reacted as any other sane woman would have. She is married to a prince whom she loves and respects completely. She has pretty much removed herself from the safety of her fathers name, and is living in a land she is unfamiliar with. Moreover, she has no real support system to turn to other than Emilia. Yet, even Emilia is not completely on her side because she is the dutiful wife of Iago. Desdemona had nothing to gain and everything to lose if she would've been defiant with Othello. Adding to the mixture is the zeitgeist that Desdemona lived in. It was only natural for the woman to do whatever it took to keep their husbands happy and she did. She took the belittling with a grain of salt and did what she could to rectify the situation. Even though I, in today's society, would've punched Othello in the mouth for speaking to me that way, I can't say for sure that my reaction would've been the same if I was living in Desdemona's time. So I guess in the end, and regardless of how crappy the actions she took were, she made the best choice for all of those involved.

Blog 5: Barbantio vs. Leonato

Barbantio and Leonato are two fathers who completely adore, praise, and believe in their daughter's. They hold the highest opinions of their daughters and never forget to sing their praises. Due to their undying love and faith in their children, they are deeply distraught and torn apart when they feel their daughters have wronged them. Both believe their daughters are faithful to their wishes and would always obey what daddy says under any and all circumstances. I think it is key in understanding the astronomical faith these fathers have in their daughters in order to fully understand the plays. When these fathers realize that their daughters aren't "little miss perfect" they feel as though their entire world is caving in around them. Having a daughter that is defiant or has been ummm... deflowered before marriage was probably the worst thing possible for a father during Shakespearean times. Their daughters were then viewed as damaged goods and would probably never marry. Barbantio and Leonato both wanted to beat the crap out of whomever questioned their daughters. When the accusations were based in truth, the father's then turned their anger to their daughters. Both Desdemona and Hero were belittled, almost disowned, and put through a lot of mental anguish due to their fathers disappointment. Barbantio and Leonato initially had a lot of respect for the men in their daughter's life. They felt Othello and Claudio were men of honor and they were looked upon like adopted sons. Leonato reacted to Claudio appropriately. He shunned him and made him feel extremely guilty for wronging his daughter and his family's name. Massive apologies were called for and there were severe repercussions for Claudio's actions. Once the situation was amended Leonato forgave Claudio and fully accepted him as his own. Barbantio on the other hand never really fully accepted the part Othello played in wooing his daughter. Othello was never fully accepted again as an adopted son. He was always "the Moor" to Barbantio and was always viewed as the man who stole his only daughter.