|
|
Post by minjaeyang on Mar 10, 2013 1:20:27 GMT -5
I think after listening to everyone's opinions, making a play like Hamlet did was not such a bad idea. To be really honest, I do not know what I have done if I were in Hamlet's shoes. After all, everything does scene like a crazy story in the end.
|
|
|
|
Post by michellelee on Mar 10, 2013 3:32:49 GMT -5
I think this wasn't the best idea because we don't know for sure that Claudius reacted that way because he felt guilty of his murder. Maybe he is one of those people who cannot watch movies or plays with murder or scary stories. This also could be related to the theme of uncertainty because we cannot know for sure the reason why Claudius stopped the play.
|
|
|
|
Post by julielu on Mar 14, 2013 2:06:52 GMT -5
hello
|
|
|
|
Post by sojounggg on Mar 17, 2013 10:54:40 GMT -5
there could have been anothere way to find out.
just showing an acting play and seeing the reactin is not that acurate
|
|
|
|
Post by seongrae on Mar 18, 2013 8:53:18 GMT -5
The information that Hamlet got about his father’s death was from a ghost. There was no evidence that could convince people because even at that time Hamlet only got the information from the ghost. So, Hamlet just rationally telling people about what he thinks might just let other people to think Hamlet is crazy. Either way, Hamlet will become like a crazy person.
My suggestion of other ways to prove that Claudius killed his father is to find more evidence before rationally telling anyone because no one will believe it unless they saw a ghost telling everything to them.
|
|
|
|
Post by sojounggg on Mar 19, 2013 21:54:17 GMT -5
hamlet could have ..........
i dont know
it is too competecated.
if it was 21th century we can find dna and look for the reall hidden killer...
but one thing i want to say is acting crazy was not a great choice
|
|
|
|
Post by sarahlee2 on Mar 27, 2013 6:29:30 GMT -5
I don't think that logic would have gotten Hamlet. Maybe if Hamlet had been accusing just a servant or a commoner it might have worked, but because he was accuaing the king of the country, no one would have believed him. Some people might still have thought that Hamlet qas crazy by saying those stuff. I think I would think that even if Hamlet came to me and rationally explained that a ghost told him Claudius murdered his dad. While I don't think going crazy is the best idea, his plan to prove to himself of Claudius's murder worked.
|
|
|
|
Post by davidh on Mar 30, 2013 11:21:03 GMT -5
I think he did good job doing so because It's purpose was to see King's action and he succeed it. I think it was actually very clever for teenager to find a way to see other's emotional feeling by using play. If I were Hamlet, I would have done the same thing If I have thought of it.
|
|
|
|
Post by junaen0416 on Apr 3, 2013 7:54:55 GMT -5
I don't think its a bright idea to just pop out that the Claudius killed the King. Its just utter madness because the kingdom was at the brink of war, it would not put Hamlet at risk only, the whole citizens would be in chaos. All would blame Hamlet for putting the state in real danger. So, Hamlet did play out well the way he handled the situation until to the point where he killed Polonius, that just messed everything up.
|
|
|
|
Post by alexkoo on Apr 7, 2013 8:59:19 GMT -5
Well, i think it is pretty good idea since i cannot think of any other way that is better than Hamlet's way. If killed someone and I see somebody making exactly same situation, i would probably faint or become pale. It is way better than saying i know you killed my father. I think Hamlet was pretty smart even though he was little crazy too.
|
|
|
|
Post by elijahlee on Apr 7, 2013 9:05:18 GMT -5
He destroyed some credibility when he acted crazy. But, I think that he thought that his act's purpose was to try and throw people off his scent. He wanted to still keep it a secret that it was him who was investigating Claudius. He must have been scared, and slightly mad for real. He was on his descent into insanity anyways.
|
|
sang
Full Member
Posts: 121
|
Post by sang on Apr 7, 2013 9:30:06 GMT -5
I don't think that this is such a bad idea. At the time, there was no other way to express his ideas in the kingdom since that's make him everyone's enemies. Going against the King and accusing him of an act itself seems risky enough so I think that's probably why he had to take such extreme measures. So in general, I don't think that it's THAT bad of an idea.
|
|
|
|
Post by sarahlee4 on Apr 7, 2013 9:40:12 GMT -5
I think that the play was a good way to find out whether Claudius killed King Hamlet or not. Its not like anyone believed in what Hamlet was saying or anything. The only way to find out if Claudius killed his father or not was to set this play up and see for himself. I think that Hamlet was in a position where he has no one but himself so for him, this was the best idea ever.
|
|
|
|
Post by tha0ism on Apr 11, 2013 9:52:18 GMT -5
Hamlet is not even 100% sure that Claudius killed his father. Even if he tells everyone that Cluadius is the murderer, no one would believe him. They would think that he is just going crazy. Hamlet does not even have evidence to prove it. And obviously, people would believe the king rather than this insane teenager boy who gone crazy.
|
|
