Hamlet - Revenge Was Not An Act Of The Self Essays -

Hamlet - Revenge Was Not an Act of The Self In Hamlet, Shakespeare uses revenge as a major theme present throughout the work. Revenge plays a crucial role in the development of Fortinbras, Prince of Norway, Hamlet, Prince of Denmark, and Laertes, son of Polonius. All three men seek revenge for the murder of their fathers. Revenge can be interpreted as a separate character in Hamlet. Revenge is set to overcome anyone who seeks it. Initially, after each of the murders, every son had a definite course of action to obtain vengeance. Or in Hamlet's case the choice was to seek no vengeance. As the play unfolds, each young man approaches the desire for revenge and chooses a different path towards gaining it based on the guidance of another character in the play. Fortinbras' good decisions and self-control, as well as, Hamlet and Laertes' bad decisions can be attributed to the outside guidance they receive. Fortinbras, son of the slain King of Norway, is the first to seek revenge. Although King Hamlet, the now deceased King of Denmark, held sole responsibility for the death of King Fortinbras, young Prince Fortinbras seeks vengeance toward the entire country of Denmark. Horatio, a friend of Hamlet's, said, ?As it doth well appear unto our state, but to recover of us by strong hand and terms compulsatory, those foresaid lands so by his father lost (I.i.101-104). By this, Horatio is saying Fortinbras plans to forcefully regain the land King Hamlet took from King Fortinbras. Fortunately, King Claudius, the new King of Denmark, intervenes and sends two courtiers, Cornelius and Voltemand, to Norway in hopes of convincing the new King of Norway, Fortinbras' uncle, to prevent the attack. Upon hearing the message, Fortinbras' uncle vetoes Fortinbras' plan to wage war on Denmark. However, he encourages Fortinbras ?to employ his anger, against the Polack? in order to vent his rage (II.ii.74-75 ). After taking the advice of his uncle, Fortinbras additionally ?makes vow before his uncle never more to have th' assay of arms against your majesty,? (II.ii.70-71). This intervention could be what saves Fortinbras' life. With the counseling of his uncle, Fortinbras is able to put aside his longing to settle the score for his father's murder. In the end, he is greatly rewarded. Because of his persistent doubt of whether Claudius did, in fact, kill his father Hamlet defers making plans to act out his revenge. Hamlet is the hardest of the three sons to be influenced to act vengefully. Although deeply sorrowed by his father's death, he did not consider payback as an option until he meets with the ghost of his father. The ghost tells Hamlet King Claudius, his own brother, murdered him. The ghost then tells Hamlet ?to revenge his foul and most unnatural murder? (I.v.25). Although murder was an acceptable form of revenge in Hamlet's time he is uncertain about killing Claudius. However, upon his father's command, Hamlet reluctantly swears to retaliate against Claudius. Hamlet does this not because he wants to, but because his father makes it clear that it is his duty as a son. Hamlet promises to prove his love and duty by killing Claudius. Hamlet, unlike Fortinbras and Laertes, did not follow what his advisor told him without questioning why he should take the advice. As time passes, Hamlet still has not acted out the revenge he promised his father. Out of disgust for his irreverence for his father he says, ?why, what an ass am I! This is most brave, that I, the son of a dear father murdered, prompted to my revenge by heaven and hell, must like a whore, unpack my heart with words and fall a-cursing like a very drab? (II.ii.594-598). This statement prompts one to believe Hamlet has been convinced by his father's words to act, but does not want to do so hastily. Hamlet questions the validity of his revenge by devising a plan to provide evidence of King Claudius' guilt. Hamlet took advantage of his position at the local theater by instructing his actors to perform a play, which reenacts a murder similar to his father's. Then based on Claudius' response to the play, Hamlet could conclude his guilt or innocence.

1998 DBQ

1998 DBQ The perception that Federalists were loose constructionists and that Jeffersonian Republicans were very strict constructionists was very well founded, but not accurate 100% of the time. The presidency of Thomas Jefferson mainly supported the theory that the Jeffersonian Republicans were strict constructionists. James Madison's presidency supported that theory as well. Both presidents, however, made exceptions to their general policies when an issue was just too big to fit inside the tiny box of their shared school of thought.Jefferson proved himself a constructionist most of the time he was in office. In August of 1800, Jefferson's first year in office, he sent a letter to Gideon Granger (document A) stating his support for the constitution and its basic principles, and also stating that Federalists opposed those principles by their loose interpretation of the document. He implies that loose interpretation leads to change, and in this case, that will create a strong national governme nt that resembles a monarchy and doesn't adhere to the rights of states as guaranteed by the Constitution.Jefferson MonumentIn another letter, this time to Samuel Miller (document B) during his last year holding office, Jefferson reinforces the image of strict constructionism by stating that he intends to break the precedent established by his predecessors to better adhere to the Constitution's policy on separation of church and state. Jefferson's widely known philosophy that the National Bank should not be established because the Constitution didn't say that it could was another example of his strict constructionism (Blum). Blum also mentions that even in his first speech to Congress, Jefferson put the constraint on the ideas he presented them with that everything had to be done "within the limits of their Constitutional powers".Madison, also being a Democratic-Republican, supported the same principles as Jefferson. Speaking for President Madison, Daniel Webster (document...

Rosa Parks Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Rosa Parks - Research Paper Example She is that unforgettable and historically epic woman who laid the foundation for the freedom movement in the United States of America (USA). People across the globe irrevocably fall in love for the daring action of defiance taken by Parks, which ignited the blazing fire of civil rights movement that could not be suppressed and which was further potentiated by Martin Luther King, who was assisted by Parks to rise to national prominence in a very short span of time. This paper is basically an effort to present the majorly important facts and discussions related to the myriad daring accomplishments made by Parks in an order to suppress the discriminations faced by the black people in the then largely conservative and white people-dominated society. How a black woman single-handedly organized the scattered civil rights leaders across USA and motivated them to stand united against the overwhelming discriminatory system, is a larger-than-life phenomenon that still leaves many people in ut ter awe and amazement. Rosa Parks, who lived from 1913 to 2005, was a vigorous civil rights activist, who achieved such prestigious and distinguished titles from the US Congress as â€Å"the first lady of civil rights† and â€Å"the mother of the freedom movement†, along with receiving many other honors from the government as well, as a result of her mind-blowing and phenomenal freedom movements. (Junaidi). What is absolutely riveting about Rosa Parks is that a single incident in her life initiated a massive and historical civil rights movement. She became a worldwide international emblem of resistance to racial segregation. What could definitely have restricted many other black people, made Parks bold enough to stand against it with her head held high and dignity making an absolute aura around her. Those days, racial segregation and ethnic biases formed a dominant feature of the American society. Prejudice was so prevalent in the American society that black people had to suffer majorly both in their social and professional lives. The pattern of refusing jobs to the eligible black people, who even presented remarkable academic achievements, was nothing new in USA at that time. Unemployment rate and social disgrace was so prevalent among the black people that it led to devastating consequences for them and their families. What aggravated the situation was the fact the white Americans were so heavily supported by the authorities that the black people just could not gather enough courage to stand up against the society fraught with racial segregation and unjustified prejudices. This much needed courage and boldness was at last gathered by a black woman Rosa Parks, aged 42 in 1955 in Alabama, who was not largely known at that time and had not become an international icon yet. (The Obama Diary). Parks straight-off refused to obey the highly unjustified order of the bus driver to empty her seat for a white passenger. This order of the bus driver was fr aught with racial discrimination, a concept that was phenomenally common in those days. What was ordered by the bus driver was a requirement that any other black person would have readily fulfilled owing to the paralyzing fear of the dominant white society. But, with Rosa Parks, this just could