Commentary on "To Earthward" by Robert Frost

IB English
December 12^th, 2012

Commentary on “To Earthward”

             The poem “To Earthward” by Robert Frost consists of eight cross-rhymed stanzas with each 4 lines. Using iambic trimeter in the first three lines of each stanzas and dimeter in the fourth, the poem can be read with a certain rhythm; fast in the first three lines and transitioning rather abrupt after every fourth line of each stanza. There is a shift with regard to the content in the middle of the poem so that it is divided into two parts of equal length (each four stanzas à four lines). The first part is about the past and the second one is about the present, or everything that is named “now” (line 17). The poem illustrates how life changes over time: there were sweetness in youth, including pretty, pleasant things for the narrator; then in later years, life is more complex, rather “salty” (line 13), and the narrator craves relief from pain. There is also another possible interpretation: The narrator has sexual intercourse; he becomes very fierce and in the end he is frustrated because he could not get satisfied enough. In consideration of this interpretation, the structure would suggest that the love act is very rhythmic but controlled by the narrator himself.
             The following deals with the first interpretation mentioned above. Literally, the narrator describes in the first half of the poem how everything was about sweet things: kisses (line 1), scents of musk, grapevine, and honeysuckle (line 6, 7, and 10), a rose petal (line 14). In the past, those sweet things were overwhelming for the narrator: The touch of lips was “too much” (line 3) and a rose’s petal, not its thorns, was enough to cause a stinging sensation in him. The narrator could have lived only from the scents he smelled (Line 4 -5: “I lived on air that crossed me from sweet things”). In the second half of the poem, reference are made to salty things such as tears (line 21). The narrator sits on the ground with his hand pressed to the earth, “leaning on it hard” (line 27). He feels pain and soreness but it is “not enough” (line 29) for him. He wishes he would be able to feel the earth’s roughness  “to all (his) length” (line 32).
             One gets the feeling the narrator was dreamlike, romantic, and very innocent back in his youth. Alliterations such as “love” and “lips” (line 1) or “downhill” and “dusk” (line 7) emphasize the meaning of the line without actually stating it; in line 1 the meaning is kissing, in line 7 the meaning is decreasing or diminishing. Having grown older, the narrator faces the complexity of the world, realizing there are both negatives and positives. He is not caught up in the pretty superficialities anymore, like when he was younger. The stanzas of the second half of the poem are somewhat darker than the first stanzas (line 17:“no joy”, line 18: “dashed with pain”, line 19: “weariness” and “fault”), which could be interpreted as that the narrator became a realist and more experienced over the years.
             Another interpretation of the poem goes into a very different direction, namely a very sexual one. One could read the poem as if accompanying the narrator having a sexual intercourse. If seen under that light, the language Frost used for that description is very lyrical, as can be seen in line 6 (“The flow of – was it musk”) or line 9 to 10 for instance: “I had the swirl and ache from sprays of honeysuckle.”
             The first and second stanza describe the foreplay – the narrator is fascinated and sexually aroused, suggested for example by line 4 (“I lived on air”). It is probably in the evening (Line 8: “at dusk”). The third stanza describes how the love act intensifies. “Dew on the knuckle” (line 12) could be a metaphorical expression for sweat. In line 15, the narrator reveals that “the petal of the rose”, which is probably a metaphor for the female sex organ, “stung” so it can be interpreted that the female part of the act is very aroused now, too. It seems like the sexual intercourse became rather violent than romantic in stanza five and six: There is “no joy” (line 17) but “weariness and fault” (line 19) and the narrator craves “the stain of tears, the aftermark of almost too much love.” One wonders if he does something with the woman out of lust that she maybe does not want. The scents have changed: Now, there is “the sweet of bitter bark and burning clove” (lines 23 – 24), two very opulent and vigorous odors, indicating his desirousness. In the seventh stanza, the narrator seems to lever himself up and he is “stiff and sore and scarred.” The use of both alliteration and polysyndeton here emphasize his weariness so it almost seems like he is groaning. It seems like the love act is over now, as he “take(s) away (his) hand” (line 26). He has “lean(ed) on it hard”, which adds to the impression that he was rather fierce in the act than gentle. The last stanza could show the narrator’s final frustration and it could be interpreted that he had not have enough yet (Line 29: “I long for weight and strength to feel the earth as rough to all my length”). One could assume that he did not feel fully consumed yet. One is left with the question what was missing for him: Is he not satisfied with himself, or with his sexual partner, or with something else? Since he craved “the stain of tears, the aftermark of almost too much love,” one gets the impression that he expected or wanted prove for that he was a very strong sexual partner.
             These two interpretations are very different in that the first one clearly shows a change in the middle of the poem while the second one is more of a developing view into the situation. Moreover, the first interpretation does not deal with the sexual topic at all while the second interpretation is only about that. Both interpretations can be seen as valid and for both there is evidence to support the points given. Personally, I can somehow not imagine Frost to write about a sexual topic, but at the same time I view the second interpretation as more evident than the first interpretation. Whether Frost wanted to express something in the direction of my first interpretation, my second interpretation, or a complete different direction, he was definitely able to craft the poem “To Earthward” as masterful and ambiguous as that many extremly different meanings can be taken out of it.

Commentary on “Anecdote For Fathers” by William Wordsworth

IB English
January 11^th, 2013

Commentary on “Anecdote For Fathers”

             The ballad “Anecdote For Fathers” by William Wordsworth portrays how adults seek for more rationality and logic than children and captures how much adults can learn from children’s innocence and purity. The poem consists of 15 stanzas à 4 lines. Through this light and simple structure, the simplicity and innocence of children is underlined. The effect is further emphasized by the simple rhyme scheme abab. Moreover, in consideration of the title “Anecdote For Fathers,” it can be observed that the poem is like a teaching little depiction of a situation while fulfilling the features of a true anecdote: The characterization of one or more characters, a punchline, and the concentration on the basics.
             Contentwise, the poem can be divided into three parts: The first 6 stanzas are introduction of the father including a short and simple description of his son, a mentioning of the fact that they walk and talk one morning, a reminiscence of their previous home in Kilve, and lastly a description of the setting where he and his son walk together on that morning. The following 8 stanzas are a dialogue between the two figures where the father asks his son whether he would rather live in Kilve or at Liswyn farm. When his son answers that he would rather still live in Kilve, the father does not let go of the question why until the son finally takes the first suggestion that comes into his head when he sees a weather-cock: “At Kilve there was no weather-cock” (line 55). The poem ends with a short reflection of the father upon what he can learn from his son through his simple answer.
              It is interesting that the father himself seems to prefer Kilve as a home, which can be interpreted from stanzas three and four (line 9: “My thoughts on former pleasures ran”); but then he pulls himself together to focus on the walk with his son instead of following the train of thought of his “regrets” (line 14). However, it can be assumed that he lies to himself or at least tries to suppress his longing for “Kilve’s delightful shore” (line 10) and their “pleasant home” (line 11) there. He tries to convince himself that he “could not feel a pain” (line 16) with all the good things that he has around him right then (Line 15: “With so much happiness to spare”). The repetition in lines 19 – 20 (“From shade to sunshine (...) from sunshine (...) to shade”) suggests that he thinks that things inevitably change and that life goes on, and also that good things follow on bad things but simultaneously bad things follow on good things. Nature then seems to wake him out of his thoughts completely: Through the acknowledgement of the “birds warbl(ing) round” him, the father seems to realize that there can be joy and freedom through taking things more easy, as he says “each trace of inward sadness had its charm” but comes to the conclusions that living in either place – Kilve or Liswyn farm – should be fine in the end. He sets himself confident with the present situation. Thereafter, he asks his son, where he would “rather be” (line 28), at Kilve or Liswyn farm. His son “careless(ly)” (line 32) answers that he would rather be at Kilve. The father then tediously asks why, which makes him represent most adults’ need for logical evidence and rational thinking. The son’s answer seems to be too simple for the father to understand. It also seems as if he tries to control what the boy prefers by offering him what is at Liswyn farm: “For, here are woods, hills smooth and warm” (line 41). Repeatedly, he questions the child’s answer, which is emphasized be the alliteration in line 47: “Three times to”. Through the constant questioning Edward, as he is called in line 37, feels guilty and may feel to be unable to fulfill his fathers demands; maybe he senses that he hurt or at least surprised his father, which can be interpreted line 46: “He blushed with shame.” However, the child just said what he felt, without reasoning – he just happened to feel that way. As the son senses the father’s disapproval of the answer, he tries to please him by providing the first suggestion that comes into his head when he sees a weather-cock. The weather-cock represents a scientific way of thinking and thereby logic, measurement, and reasoning, and it can be interpreted that in Liswyn, things are more controlled than at Kilve. This could be the real reason why Edward would rather live at Kilve. The father seems to be touched that “the boy (unlocked) his tongue” (line 52), a metaphor that stands for the independent decision of the boy to give an answer, even if any answer, to protect his father’s feelings which also strengthens line 4: “(...) dearly he loves me.” The father finds excellence in the child’s simple answer, even if it was just a pretense, and sees that he can learn from it: Namely that it might be sometimes better to just accept things without any reasoning.
             The poem is a great reminder for humans to listen to their spiritual intelligence instead of trying to figure out everything with logic. Wordsworth thereby suggests to accept things and let go of the need for rationalization. It could be the key to more happiness, freedom and easiness of life, features that can also all be found in childhood.

Commentary on "Nutting" by William Wordsworth

IB English
January 18^th, 2013

Commentary on “Nutting”

             Written narratively, the poem “Nutting” by William Wordsworth is about a boy who seems to remember an incident of pleasure and reflection, as he went into the woods to gather nuts. It turns out at the end however, that he is actually addressing a silent listener, the “dearest Maiden” (line 54), an apostrophe that reveals that his story is composed to be a gentle lesson for the girl that the narrator speaks to.
            The poem emerges from silence, then becomes a leisurely-told, blank-verse narration with very few periods but many caesuras instead, and returns to silent conclusion in the end again. At the beginning the narrator acknowledges the day to be special: The poem starts with the first line being shifted to the right of the page and with a dash, which already shows that there is something unusual or special coming. The second line further strengthens this impression, as it is set in paranthesis and explains that this day is “one from many singled out,” stressing its distinctiveness. Another emphasis follows in the third line, where the narrator underlines that this day is “one of those heavenly days that cannot die.”
             From line 4 to 20, the boy describes how he makes his way into the woods, using much imagery and building suspense. For example, imagery is created through the mention of his “huge wallet o’er (his) shoulder” (line 6) and “nutting-crook” (line 7) with which he armed himself, and him being dressed in “cast-off weeds” (line 9) serving for disguise, walking through “tangled thickets” (line 15) and “thorns, and brakes, and brambles” (line 13). The polysyndeton there in line 13 shows the excitement and awareness of the narrator to wander in the woods and what is around him, but also shows how wild and obstructive the forest is at that place. More imagery is given through “pathless rocks” (line 14), a metaphor which serves the same purpose as the polysendeton in line 13: To show the obstruction of that part of the forest. The “beds of matted fern” (line 15) is another metaphor showing the wildness of the way the boy is taking. He has to “forc(e) his way” (line 16) through there until he reaches “one dear nook / unvisited” (line 16-17), which is one of the very many enjambements that occur in this poem. Wordsworth uses them to create audible interest and to bring various strengths into the different lines. Together with the use of many caesuras, it creates significant pauses and surprising emphases throughout the poem. Another example for the use of enjambement is in line 18 – 19: “(...) ungracious sign / of devastation.”
             After he arrived at the “dear nook” (lines 16) the narrator himself begins to pause. It becomes clear how sensual his experience is from line 19 until line 42. He is mesmerized by the “tempting (...), virgin scene” (line 20 - 21); he feels “joy” (line 23) and even voluptuousness (line 24) at the sight of “the banquet” (line 25) of the hazelnut trees. The description of his amazement about the treasure he was seeking appears wonderful, pure, and magical. In this part, repetitions such as in line 26 (“Among the flowers, and with the flowers I played”) or line 38 (“I heard the murmur and the murmuring sound”) underline his excitement and joy. Again, a lot of imagery is used, which makes the magical scene more tangible to the reader: For example in lines 29 – 30 (”(...) the bower beneath whose leaves / the violets of five seasons re-appear”), lines 32 - 33 (“where fairy water-breaks do murmur on / for ever; and I saw the sparkling foam”), and lines 34 - 26 (“with my cheek on one of those green stones / that, fleeced with moss, under the shady trees, / lay round me, scattered like a flock of sheep”). Wordsworth not only creates atmosphere through the use of imagery, but also makes the connection between human and nature very strongly. In this particular part of the poem, the idea of impericism becomes clear, as the narrator experiences the glade with most of his senses: Seeing, hearing, and touching. One could claim that the disputed sixth sense is also experienced by the boy, as he suddenly feels an overwhelming, amazing sensation by just being at this place in nature. The “violets of five seasons” (line 31) support this assumption, as there are actually only four seasons in our known system, but the violets at that place know five seasons, just as the narrator experiences 6 senses instead of the earthly common 5 ones.
             Suddenly, the purity collapses. The narrator “r(i)se(s) (up)” (line 43) and crashes down the hazels with his nook in “merciless ravage” (line 45). No reason is given for why he does that damage but it seems as if he is inhabited by a demon or driven by a strong human impulse, possibly greed. The nature, unable to defend itself, “patiently g(i)ve(s) up / (its) quiet being” (line 47 - 48) and the narrator feels “a sense of pain” (line 51) when he “beh(olds) / the silent trees, and (sees) the intruding sky” (lines 51- 52), suggesting that he feels guilty and sorry for the destruction he has done to the peaceful, magical place.
             In line 54, he addressess the “dearest Maiden” who turns out to have been listening to his story silently. There is no telling who exactly this maiden is; it might be his beloved daughter, or some other little girl, a friend, or his girlfriend, but it does not become clear through the poem. However, one can say that the narrator told the story to the maiden because he wanted to teach her something morally or emotionally; probably he wants to teach her about what the insight painfully achieved through the destruction of the magical place. As the boy in the story, the narrator found abundance and sheer delight in the natural surrounding he came across, but through his greed or rapacity, it was quickly taken away from him. Thus, the treasure one has found can quickly vanish when met with wrong, coercive, or too impulsive intentions. With the last line “there is a spirit in the woods” (line 56), the poem ends strongly, suggesting there is not only a fairy-tale like quality to it but a sacred one. This last line is also the point where the poem slips into final silence, as if the narrator has accomplished what he wanted to bring across.
             Through the many breaks by use of caesuras, comma-and-dash punctuations, and enjambements, the poem offers the lesson to the reader carefully, not intending to force the reader into the poem but rather capturing him or her gently with balance. The poem is, through the lingering scene-setting, through the moral lesson given, and through the use of much imagery, remarkable and teaches not only the maiden addressed, but generally every human being how to live and love right. Since the poem ends with the lesson about moderation and respect, the listener or reader is willing to apply that wisdom in one’s dealing with nature and surrounding in the near future. 

William Wordsworth "To my sister" Commentary

IB English
January 24^th, 2013

Commentary on “To my Sister”

             In a jovial but serious tone, the poem “To my Sister” by William Wordsworth addresses the speaker’s “sister” (line 9, 37) and invites her to abandon “haste (and) morning task” (line 11) in order to feel more and be in contact with nature. The poem consists of 10 stanzas with each four verses and the rhyme scheme is abab, which creates - together with the use of many alliteration and assonances - a pleasant rhythmic pattern. This pattern matches the flow of nature and life advocated by the speaker.
             In the first two stanzas, the speaker describes the current atmosphere; it is the beginning of spring (Line 1: “the first mild day of March”) and plants and animals begin to re-awaken. The narrator experiences the moment with his senses and feels pleasure. In the second stanza, he invites his sister to use her senses and “feel the sun” (line 12) as well instead of rushing through tasks. In the next two stanzas, he emphasizes that there should not be “joyless forms (that) regulate / our living calendar” (line 17 - 18) such as books that he requests his sister to leave at home (line 15). The following three stanzas further underline how only feeling and living in the present moment would bring true happiness in contrast to “years of toiling reason” (line 26). In the next stanza, the speaker promises that this way of existing would bring “blessed power that rolls / above, below, above” (line 32 – 33) and that their souls would be finally “tuned to love” (line 35). The last stanza is partially repeats the fourth stanza and thereby emphasizes his want for his sister to come (line 37) and join him “for this one day” (line 39).
             It can be interpreted that the speaker has experienced cosmic integrity with the nature and wants his sister, who is probably very close to him, to feel the same. He desires to celebrate the opening of spring with her with the elemental forms of nature, for example she should wear her “woodland dress” which could be a symbol for harmony with nature. The speaker intensely urges the importance of feeling, for example in line 12: “Come forth and feel the sun” and line 24: “It is the hour of feeling.” He would love to abandon human concepts and structures such as time (Lines 17 – 20: “no joyless forms shall regulate / our living calendar (...) We from to-day (...) will date the opening of the year”) and reason (Lines 25 – 26: “One moment now may give us more than years of toiling reason”). However, he declares that their hearts will make “some silent laws” but because those laws would come from the heart, they would have their lives in their own hands, which is further emphasized through the mention of the “blessed power” (line 32). Moreover, it means that these laws or the power originates from love, an idea that is repeated several times in the poem (for example line 21: “Love, now a universal birth” or line 36: “(souls) shall be tuned to love”). It becomes clear that the speaker has experienced a magical connection and an all-encompassing love through nature; for him, “each minute (is) sweeter than before” (line 2) as he encounters the nature through sight, sound, and feeling. Wordsworth uses imagery (for example line 3- 4: “The redbreast sings from the tall larch that stands beside our door”) and the concept of impericism to deliver this insight. One stanza is of particular interest here: In lines 7-8 (“To the bare trees, and mountains bare, and grass in the green field”) Wordsworth uses repetition, alliteration, and polysyndeton all at once for emphasis and describes (lines 5- 8) that there is an unidentifiable “blessing in the air” that seems like “a sense of joy.” This effects that the power of nature is strengthened, because the “sense of joy” yields to bare trees, bare mountains, and the green grass that represent pure, simple yet beautiful nature. In line 25, an interesting assonance of different o-sounds is used (“One moment now may give us more”) to make this line stand out from the others in order to show how important that one moment is for the whole life and for the spirit. It is further made clear through the personified metaphor “Our minds shall drink at every pore / the spirit of the season” (lines 27 – 28). It can be interpreted as that the minds, that are considered as the rational part of humankind, thirst for something inexplicable, namely the “spirit of the season.” The speaker wants to take it all in. This desire for fulfilment becomes more clear in line 34 (“About, below, above”) through the use of asyndeton; it effects the conclusion that the power of experiencing the present moment and nature is overwhelming and everywhere without gaps or breaks.
             In conclusion, Wordsworth speaks out with this poem how enriching it is if one just lets go of the duties and the rush of the imprisoned mind and instead experiences the moment. It is a concept of feeling and sensing instead of figuring things out logically; the senses and the soul against the mind. Although addressing the sister personally and with urge, this poem becomes an appeal to everybody as the theme of feeling discussed in the poem makes the reader identify with it just as if he or she would be addressed as well.

Character analysis in Hamlet: Polonius

IB English

Character analysis in Hamlet: Polonius

40 + Lines:

POLONIUS
- speaking to Laertes: Act I, scene 3, lines 55 - 81
- speaking to the king: Act II, scene 2, lines 42 – 49 and lines 163 – 164
- speaking to Hamlet: Act II, scene 2, lines 187 – 191 and line 389
- speaking to Ophelia: Act III, scene 1, lines 43 - 49

             Polonius is a overly devoted character. He appears for the first time in Act I, scene 3 and is killed in Act III, scene 4 by Hamlet. It becomes clear immediately that he wants things to go his way in an almost controlling way: In Act I, scene 3, he orders his children, Laertes and Ophelia, to follow his instructions about proper behavior. For example, he pretends to give great advice to his son about how to act with integrity and practicality, but actually he expects his son to do so in order to preserve his own prestige. It could thus be interpreted that he is more worried about his reputation than about the wellfare of his children. His orders are masked as advice. The authority over his children, especially over Ophelia who is the weaker female member of the family, is unquestioned. He pries into their affairs (Act II, scene 2), ridicules his daughter and forbids her to see Hamlet (Act I, scene 3). Thus, instead of providing comfort, his paternal role involves self-centered decisions and manipulative qualities. The two children obey him without hesitation (Act I, scene 3, lines 82 and 136).
             A similarly strong devotion can be seen in regard to his relation to King Claudius. He gives various advices to the king how to act and how to proceed (for example Act II, scene 2, lines 163 – 164: “Be you and I behind an arras then; mark the encounter”) and thereby appears quite vain. Through his advice to Laertes to care about prestige it became clear how much he himself worries about his reputation, therefore it can be assumed that he fears to be discarded by the king when he does not provide enough counseling. Because of this, it can also be understood why Polonius meddles so much in the lives of his children - he even lets Reynaldo spy on Laertes (Act II, scene 1)- namely because he might be worried about is worried how Laertes’ behavior might reflect back onto himself. Therefore, Polonius appears to be very self-absorbed 
             Polonius behaves self-assured and important (for example “My lord, I have news to tell you” line 389 in Act II, scene 2) but most of the times he talks he is sermonizing, verbose, and meddling. He believes that he understands more than he actually does (for example in Act II, scene 2, lines 187 – 191: Polonius gives a “when I was your age” speech, which is nothing but a lame advice or unwanted opinion). Because of this, as mentioned above, he appears to be vain, and his arrogance becomes further clear. He goes as far as to use other people to achieve his ideas, for example in Act II, scene 2, where he proposes to gain information about Hamlet through her. He treats her like a puppet and completely disregards her privacy. Another similar example is when he proposes to use Gertrude to find out about Hamlet’s motivations (Act III, scene four). He instructs the queen on how to behave (“Tell him his pranks have been too broad to bear with, and that your grace hath screen’d and stood between heat and him”). It is interesting that he dies amidst his falsehoods (Act III, scene four: ““O! I am slain”), suggesting that he has acted immorally and egoistically.
             In conclusion, Polonius is more concerned about his own reputation than about the feelings and well-being of others. He puts a lot of effort into achieving what he thinks is right and uses long, verbose speeches to convince of his side; in the end however, he is killed through one of his own sly plans.

Hamlet’s Character Foils – Laertes

IB English
February 13^th, 2013

Hamlet’s Character Foils – Laertes

             In Shakespeare’s drama “Hamlet,” the two characters Hamlet and Laertes are in obvious contrast two each other. Hamlet - the son of the dead King Hamlet of Denmark - is a contemplative, alecky, and moody young man, while Laertes, a young Danish lord - son of Polonius and brother of Ophelia – is impulsive and immediate. Both of them face very similar problematic issues: The desired departure from home, being spied on, the death of Ophelia, and the murder of their father respectively. By reference to these four situations it will be discussed below how Hamlet and Laertes can be compared to each other.
             In Act I, scene 2, it is revealed that Hamlet wants to return to England (lines 111 to 122). Similarly, Laertes wants to return to France (lines 50 – 56). Laertes asks for permission and receives – in addition to a lengthy advice from his father, see act I, scene 3 – approval to leave (lines 57 – 63). Hamlet, in contrast, obeys his step-father’s and mother’s will to stay in Denmark instead of following his heart’s desire (line 120). This comparison of the two character’s dealing with leaving Denmark suggests that Laertes takes a stand for himself while Hamlet rather subordinates himself. However, one needs to consider the circumstances of the moment, of course: Because Hamlet just lost his father, it can be assumed that he obeys Claudius and the queen because he does not want to cause further complications. Under different conditions, he might have had not obeyed, especially because he is so displeased about the marriage of his mother and Claudius.
             It is noticeable that both Hamlet and Laertes are being spied on: Polonius, the father of Laertes, asks Reynaldo to spy on his son for reputation purposes (Act II, scene 1) while Claudius, the step-father of Hamlet, asks Rosencrantz and Guildenstern to spy on Hamlet to ensure his own maintaining of power (Act II, scene 2). Therefore, both Laertes and Hamlet are tracked and observed by third parties which shows that they are sparsely trusted by their guardians. Just like the experience of their respective father’s death as discussed below, this incident represents an involuntary similarity between the two characters. While one finds out that Hamlet cleverly detects that Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are manipulated by Claudius and spy on him (act II, scene 2), one does not get any information about how Laertes reacts on Reynaldo spying on him.
             Concerning the death of Ophelia (act IV, scene 1), the two characters react opposing to each other. Just recently having suffered from the loss of his father, Laertes itches for a fight with Hamlet because it can be assumed that Ophelia killed herself partially because of the death of her father. It can be debated whether Hamlet therefore caused Ophelia’s death through his murder of Polonius, but Hamlet never expresses any guilt. In any way, Laertes’ grief must be intense because he really loved Ophelia, which can be seen through his care for her (act I, scene 3) and the way he passionately embraces her for one last time (act IV, scene 1). Hamlet, in comparison, seems shocked and suddenly declares his love for Ophelia at the funeral in fury, but it does not seem very credible because of the way he treated her before (see act III, scene 1). The two fight in Ophelia’s grave about who loved her more and Hamlet claims he is as willing to be buried with her as Laertes. He then challenges Laertes to settle the matter in another fight, which prefaces the end of the drama where all the main characters are killed.
             Both Hamlet and Laertes have to face the death of their fathers respectively. The death of Hamlet’s father had a very depressing effect on him. He broods and asks himself a whole lot of questions before taking revenge for his father. Laertes, in contrast, takes immediate action. He storms back from France as soon as he finds out about Polonius’ death; he then starts a crowd and invades the palace. This shows Laertes’ impulsive and hasty character in contrast to Hamlet’s reserved nature. One could say while Laertes is passionate and active, Hamlet is passionately inactive. Laertes’ hastiness and little thought he spends on the consequences of his revenge catalyze the death of himself and the main characters in the end. He realizes this when he cries out “I am justly killed with mine own treachery” (act V, scene 1, line 337).
             In conclusion, Hamlet and Laertes have to deal with similar crises. However, they react on them in different ways. While Hamlet is the one more pensive and passive, Laertes is impulsive and reacts immediately. In this way, Laertes is an obvious character foil to Hamlet. 

Theme: Complete control of one's fate is not possible. Commentary on Oedipus Rex

IB English

Complete control of one’s fate is not possible: Commentary on “Oedipus Rex”

             Fate is an obvious, thought-provoking theme in “Oedipus Rex” by Sophocles. In general, fate is when one’s life is determined by a certain force or higher being, or not controlled by one’s own free will. In “Oedipus Rex”, the idea of controlling one’s fate by avoiding what an oracle has said is a significant part of the plot.
             Oedipus seeks relief from the problem of his diseased kingdom by trying to explore what was causing the problem (60 – 72), in other words trying to control the situation. He wants to find out who killed Laius and punish that person so that he would have the “worst of agonies (wearing) out his wretched life” (164 – 170, 283 – 288), which is an example for dramatic irony in the play because later it turns out that Oedipus himself killed Laius. By Teiresias, an old prophet, he was told the revelation of the problem would be better to be left unknown (380 – 382, 395 – 398) but Oedipus declares he would be “a wicked man if (he would) not act on all the god reveals” (98-99) and is determined to punish the killer of Laius, thus again acting against fate and attempting to control the situation through his free will. He does it mainly out of good intention because he wants to save his land from suffering, but thereby he basically sets out his own fatal fate, a circumstance already recognized by Teiresias (421: “For the accused polluter of this land is you”). Because Oedipus can not accept things as they were and is rather driven by pride and determination, he turns into his own worst enemy and destroys his relationships and himself. His assertion of that he would “find the man who spilled (Laius’) blood and (...) avenge (him)” (310 – 313) becomes true, and he himself becomes the man he vowed to punish.
              It is then revealed that when Oedipus was born his parents have also wanted to control fate: A prophecy said that their son would kill his father, so they gave the little child away and wanted it to be killed (1402 – 1418). It is interesting to note that the oracle only told of the murder of Laius, not of the incest with Jocasta. In any way, the servant had pity and gave the child to a shepherd instead of killing it and the shepherd in turn gave it to a childless couple. It is also interesting to note that the oracle did not allow the possibility of the two parents having a son who killed the father, it said that it will definitely occur. It shows how the gods have already drawn out peoples’ lives and one’s fate is inevitable.
             Very significantly, Oedipus himself received a prophecy saying that he would kill his own father and marry his mother (1182 – 1183). As a consequence he left his adoption family in Corinth to flee from his designated fate, which signifies that he had good intentions. It again becomes clear how Oedipus thinks he can change his own fate by exploring it and investigating in it. He attempts to completely avoid the prophecy but it became true anyway because Oedipus’ parents were not the ones in Corinth; his father was the old man he met on the road and struck him on his head to force him off the road (960 – 975). He then came to Thebes and was celebrated as he was successful in saving the city from the sphinx. He married the king’s widow and became the new king. Thus, the whole prophecy became true, thus displaying a self-fulfilling prophecy; Oedipus could not escape it even if he thought he did through his own choices.
             In conclusion, Oedipus does not seem to believe that fate dominates his whole life, at least he tries to make choices that go against the prophesied fate. He does that out of good intention. Then however, he has to face the truth of that the prophecies of the gods are unavoidable and he can not escape his fate, and that he could not changed it even though he tried hard. The whole affair is very tragic but in the end shows how it was not his fault, but a product of forces beyond his control. Sophocles therefore suggests that while fate inevitably exists, men still make their own decisions and are responsible for them. One’s future is already determined but free will is the factor deciding how one gets there. Oedipus’ mistake was not that he had killed his father and married his mother, but that he tried to go against the fate by interfering with his attempt to avoid the oracle.