hamlet is just a story, no?
So I finally finished my common app essay! woo hoo! Ok, now don't roll your eyes, all you ED and EA ppl. I put in soo much work into this. And I got an A from that extremely hard hard grader of an English teacher that I told you about. Yay!
But today, I had a meeting with the same teach, Mr. DeVito, in whose class we've been spending the last month analazing Hamlet. After talking about some essays that we did in class, he asked me, as a send-off gesture, what I thought about Hamlet so far. I looked at him and said, quite seriously, that I thought that we were spending way too much time on it.
"What?!!!" he exclaimed, and sat up straight. Now he was alert and amazed.
"Well, it is just a story, and fiction at that. I mean..."
"OMIGOD!" he yells, and pounds the table. "Just a book? Noo, no.. Sam-yukta.."
And he stalks off to the center of the teacher carrols, and tells everyone there, pointing at me, "See that girl there? Sam-yukta? She told me that Hamlet is just a story." with a touch of disbelieving, incredulous wonder.
Then about seven teachers lean sideways from their work stations to look at me, with exactly the same expressions.
-Way to piss off the teacher who's gonna write your college recommendation.
Keep it up, Sam-yu.
posted by Sanjukta at 8:03 PM
7 Comments:
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
9:11 PM, November 02, 2005
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
9:11 PM, November 02, 2005
SAMYU!!!
YOU SELF-DESTRUCTIVE PRAGMATIST PREMED! SURE YOU MAY THINK LITERATURE IS USELESS, BUT IF YOU LET YOUR TEACHERS KNOW THAT, HOW WILL YOU EVER GET INTO UROCH?! URG MY HARVARD BRAHMIN BLOOD IS BOILING!
ANGRILY,
DYLAN
;-)
9:13 PM, November 02, 2005
whose were the first two 'deleted' comments?
and dylan, i never said that hamlet was a bad piece of lit or anything. hahha, i just felt that spending so much time on one piece of lit is kind of limiting. And I mean, think about it - if this was Shakespeare's first play, and he wasn't such a big name by then, do you think that it would have been so successful. Sometimes, I feel like we tend to glorify certain pieces of art just because of its brand. (Like how self-conscious kids buy Nike labelled T-shirts just b/c...) Would we be in the same state of worshipping amazement about the multiple layers in the play if this was by an unknown playwright? Wouldn't we tend to dismiss it as a convoluted piece of pompous garbage? Isn't that how most first-time authors get the axe?
10:15 PM, November 02, 2005
Aha, that's damn good Samyu. That'll cut the mustard anywhere including (sniff) Cambridge.
In all seriousness, that's gutsy. I'm hope you realized the above post was made with tongue planted quite completely in cheek, and that in fact I admire you for taking on the Bard.
10:47 PM, November 02, 2005
Although I haven't read Hamlet, There's something I'd like to point out. Based on the social context and the 'dedicatees' of the plays, some people believe that almost all the plays were actually written by some woman, I can't remember the name. She was an aristocratic woman I know, quite possibly the queen. Now imagine if she were actually credited for writing these pieces, think of all the possibilities! People may praise it more because it came from a woman, others may praise it less because it in fact came from an individual of higher strata. Either that, or people would maintain the original opinions. I think this raises a good point, which acknowledges that whomever the author, the plays were darn good. Why do people focus more on Hamlet than Titus Andronicus? I mean surely, Hamlet is a reoccurring title in English courses for a reason?
11:55 PM, November 03, 2005
OK, several points:
Samyukta, it seems to me that your teacher's problem was not the content of your comment but mainly its tone. As Dr. Dave informs us, you can say whatever you want in English class as long as you say it clearly and back it up with an argument. Saying Hamlet is "just a story" is certainly not going to sit well with an English teacher - it sounds like you don't know what you're talking about. Better to say something like, uh . . . "Although Hamlet is a well-written and complex piece of literature, I find its subject matter far removed from my own experience, and consequently, I feel that our class time would be better spent studying, say, the works of Nick Hornby." No reasonable English teacher would berate you for a comment like that. Not that anyone would be able to think of a statement like that right there in English class . . . but you get my point, I hope.
Henrik, I haven't read either Hamlet or Titus Andronicus (although I've seen film adaptations of Hamlet), but I asked my mom (English major) about why Hamlet beats Titus Andronicus, and she said Hamlet is simply a more inventive and complex story than Titus Andronicus. Titus Andronicus is based on the standard revenge story (which we see today in westerns, martial arts movies, etc.) Hamlet is also about revenge, but instead of just adapting the basic form, it questions the concept of a revenge story - is revenge really what you want? is it worth the price? That's what makes it great. Plus a standard helping of Shakesperean poetic genius. Also, Titus Andronicus never gets performed anymore because it's just plain gross and bloody.
8:14 PM, November 05, 2005
Post a Comment
<< Home