Many people look at themselves in the mirror and say, ” I know who I am.” But how many of them have done so after analyzing themselves through a story? And if they have done that, how many of them were being honest with themselves? A Lacanian analysis can bring out sides of us that we didn’t know existed. I found this to be true after reading “The Most Dangerous Game.” By looking at the events in the story and the characters that play them out, I found that there is a part of me that has an insatiable curiosity and a love of danger.
To begin with, by looking closely at the main characters and their actions, I found a small part of myself in each of them. When Rainsford heard gunshots from the yacht, he jumped up onto the ship’s railing. My initial response was, “Why would you do such a thing when no one is there to help if you fall?” I believe that this was my logical, sensible reaction. However, if I look at the situation with a sense of curiosity I find that I would have done the same thing. I think this is because, even though I’ve always tried to be a responsible, reasoning person, I have always had a desire to be carefree and daring. I think that want comes from movies I’ve seen in the past and books I’ve read in which the female characters were adventurous and lived for danger. I can remember times when I would finish reading a book, perhaps, and try to be just like the adventuring character.
I can also look at General Zaroff, too, and see a hidden facet to my person. What I first thought of the General was that he was disgusting, evil, and had no respect for human life. I thought, “Oh my gosh, what if there really are people like this in the world?” However, when General Zaroff laid all the cards on the table and stated his purpose, hunting people, specifically Rainsford, I was oddly intrigued. I was frustrated with myself for being interested in such an inhumane game. But upon further examination of my reaction, I found that it wasn’t the game that literally that fascinated me, but the concept of it; the danger. I feel that this interested me because the very few tastes of danger that I’ve had in the past have appeared to me as fun, actually living life to the fullest extent.
Irony in Hamlet
Irony in Hamlet
This essay will discuss the issue of irony in Hamlet by dealing with the problems that arise as a result of Hamlet’s attempt to avenge his father’s death. One of the central problems is the clash between Hamlet’s overpowering need to believe in the ghost of his father, who is the authoritative figure in his life, and the awareness that he lacks empirical knowledge of the truth. In trying to achieve this knowledge, Hamlet sets out on a mixed mission of accusation, revenge and the search for truth, finally causing the upset of the original revenge plot when it ricochets off Polonius’ dead body and hits Hamlet in the name of Laertes.
As a tragedy, Hamlet deals very heavily in anguish and frustration that are not necessarily allowed the means to be resolved or dissipated. Marvin Rosenberg notes in his essay, “Subtext in Shakespeare”, that in tragedies, there are greater uncertainties and the “mystery of the character deepens, and the subtext is subtler, more open to variable interpretation”(82). Hence, unlike Viola, Hamlet’s actions overlay motivations of greater ambiguity and these actions, as the play progresses, seemed that they are not primed to make the situation come a full circle. Instead of a an equilibrium, therefore, one finds a form of usurpation where the crown of Denmark, represented by both Claudius and Hamlet, is removed and taken by a foreign prince, Fortinbras.
Hamlet’s desire for vengeance came about as a result of the ghost’s appearance and his accusatory speech in which he extorts his son to “Revenge his foul and most unnatural murder” (1.5.25). Hamlet is at once struck with the problem of whether he should believe that the ghost is really that of his father and …
… middle of paper …
Kreiger, Elliot. “Malvolio and Class Ideology”. Bloom (19-26).
Leverenz, David. “The Woman in Hamlet: An Interpersonal View”. Schwartz, Murray M. and Coppelia Kahn, eds. Representing Shakespeare: New Psychoanalytic Essays. Baltimore: John Hopkins U P, 1980.
Nevo, Ruth. Comic Transformations in Shakespeare. London: Methuen