Hamlet Act I

I find it extremely perceptive of Hamlet that even though he is in a state of grief he focuses more on the suspicion he has as to what causes his fathers death, not to dwell on it but to make sure he isn't taking things laying down like everyone else after this tragedy. It is not known for sure if Gertrude has any suspicions and is simply turning the other cheek to appear happily married for the sake of Denmark or if she really is ignorant and blinded by Claudius' love. Either way she wants Hamlet to put out any doubts in his mind that might hurt Claudius.

The ghost wouldn't come back to Hamlet without some sort of motive. At first Hamlet isn't convinced if it is the Devil in the shape of his deceased father who's trying to make Hamlet into some sort of murderer to sabotage his chance at ruling Denmark, or if it is really his father.

 Even if this apparition wasn't real, so to speak, and only in Hamlet's mind, it still didn't mean he was crazy. His mind was making him see the truth and he knew that even if he was going insane he had to test the ghost's words on Claudius.

Sometimes the minds perception of something isn't fully comprehendible to all, but for few, it can help insure justice and punish wrongdoing.

Hidden treasures & pleasures

1) The power of the imagination is often exalted in Romantic poetry. In your opinion, does “Kubla Khan” celebrate the imagination or caution against its indulgence? To whom might Coleridge be writing and for what purpose(s)?
Coleridge is saying anything is understandable to imagine but taking it to another level is simply crazy. Just as one might get too carried away in life's simple or ornate pleasures, imagination is difficult because it can drive one to belive somethinmg that isnt true. He is writing to any one who feels their real life isnt grand enough and like to think optimisticaly but wanrs them too not dream bigger than what you can accomplish. Even when ones life is as they would like it to be, it shouldnt go to your head.

2) Even in the brief space of a sonnet, Shelley suggests a number of narrative frames. How many speakers do you hear in "Ozymandias"? What does each of these voices seem to say to you (or to others) as listeners?

I hear the narrator whom desbribes himself in a sentance as "I" and he is the basis for the entire poem for he is taught about this work of art that tells the Kings decree on it. Then A traveler tell the narrator about these pieces that lie in the middle of the desert and they are so unique they tell the story of their sculptors and how they wanted to be remebered. The piece bores the words of the King Ozymandias on it, the third and final speaker. He claims to know his kingdom has fallen all around and yet his works will live on forever in the sand where he used to reign.

Sweeping and Weeping (Not Cinderella)

The opposite of reason is usually emotion, but Blake uses vivid imagery in his poetry that create pictures in readers' minds mind making them use imagination to form a conclusion. Blake did have the power to enact social change by appealing to the sensitivity readers tend to have for situations involving peverty and child labor. Had he used reason, this poem would have still attracted peoples attention. An example of using reason instead of imagination would have been stating how many hours a day children had to work and what conditions they were in. Imagination is necessary to imagine a child’s cry of “‘weep ‘weep ‘weep” or a child’s resentment he has towards his parents who made him work. Blake was trying to write to all people of all social classes so he could create something that everyone could agree needed political recognition and change, such as child labor laws. Coming from the upper class himself, he tends to use many clichés to represent what he thinks a suffering child would feel. It isn’t a fault of his poetry because he at least had the knowledge to be aware these problems were occurring and needed to be fixed. The poems have two versions; one from the Songs of Innocence and one from the Songs of Experience. Innocence is usually associated with naivety and experience tends to gain wisdom. We can gather that the child chimney sweeper who is angry at his parents in the “Songs of Experience” is correct in his reasoning and the child who is “innocent” has a lot to learn about the real world for he isn’t angry with his parents. The innocent child however, could also be admired for being more hopeful even in a time of sorrow while the “experienced” child is more cynical and that doesn’t help in life either. Blake tried to make people feel sympathy for these children while still hoping they would realize hope can be found no matter what situation you’re in but don’t ever let your guard down too much and seem weak.


The Parliament transcript was included in the textbook as way to get the perspective of a child who really went through these tough times Blake tried to describe but never really lived. It was short and to the point but still got emotion out of its readers because the situation is upsetting no matter how it is presented. It was a bit too dry and emotionless and I didn’t understand why the child speaking didn’t express true sorrow. It changes the way I read both of Blake’s interpretations because the real children who went through this obviously coped with it by suppressing their emotions and the one from the transcript wouldn’t have agreed with Blake’s overly dramatized crying and angry sentiments. Maybe the child was shy due to the situation he was put in and didn’t want to show what he really felt. I believe all the texts get a reaction out of their audiences.

Little People, Big World

a) The way the government rules has many people that object to it. The "Rules", like breaking an egg at the convenient place, are up for individual interpretation. Laws today are still vague, which is why people are wrongfully accused and arrested today. There also is a question as to whether religion belongs in government because in this passage they go by the "Brundercral" which is like their version of a Quaran or Bible. It is ironic that a man with such physical strength over these little Lilliputians actually lets them rule him. He could take action and obtain his freedom but he doesn't try nor does he want to leave. Language isn't the only way to communicate. Certain gestures show that one means no harm, no matter how strong they look. Some questions to address are : Is language the only way to communicate? Why can't the more powerful in size Gulliver overthrow these little people? What is Swift saying about his society AND modern day? Is Gulliver only superior to these people in size? Is Gulliver dreaming or did he do something to deserve to be put into this world? Why were the Lilliputians so generous with their resources?

b) I thought this group work was similar to all the other work we do in groups. I prefer teaching to the class. Also people dont take it as seriously as they should when there aren't strict rules to it. I like the freedom to write anything but i think some people have a hard time with it. I learned that some texts aren't easy to address with different view points and this one was full of satire to be interpreted one way. Our group didn't have many conflicting ideas. There were things that some might have missed, such as the tight rope walker.

c) We split up our lesson into "questions" and "issues about society". The clear approach to teaching this excerpt was to pull out the many elements of satire and who they addressed i.e. government, culture, individuals. Swift thinks that his government is strong enough to rule anyone but then again the way they rule is up for debate because some things involve opinionated mind control.