Hamlet - loyalty WTF??? (1 Viewer)

[NoName91]

I loved it. I believe I discussed the idea of loyalty being a dynamic issue (remind you of something in paper 1?). I discussed the conflict of Hamlet's loyalty towards either the state or his own blood (his father). Yeah the whole of paper 2 was great...And can you believe it? 3 essays for me!

 

[Ethanescence]

I think it's quite possible to have accurately interpreted the question thematically (e.g. loyalty as a theme is expressed through Hamlet attempting to avenge his father's murder, etc) or in terms of the play's structure and construction (e.g. Shakespeare's Hamlet represents the significance of loyalty through the play's conventional adherence to Senecan/Aristotelian/Kydian tragedy... OR... Shakespeare's Hamlet shows the impact of disloyalty and subversion when Hamlet's suicidal soliloquies challenge established religious doctrines, etc).

 

[noturningback]

Yeah I wasn't a big fan, I mainly spoke about his loyal duty to his father to avenge his death then spoke about the "human experiences" that interfered with his capacity to do so (Such as the deceptive nature of mankind and spiritual ambiguity with the ghost)
I was annoyed that I had to scrap my third main point on death/existence/afterlife as it didn't fit with loyalty

 

[Libby01P]

just a thought guys... when they said "loyalty"
they dont mean a theme of loyalty right?
I interpreted as how this text has the ability to generate an evolving spectrum of responses...

am i wrong?

Yeah I did that. I talked about how there was loyalty to themes of the experience of the human condition throughout the play; subversion of Aristotlean tragedy shows disloyalty to Elizabethan context; loyalty to monarchy (a Greenblatt thing) and effect on my context; and then loyalty/disloyalty between characters - Ghost, Claudius, Hamlet's disloyalty to parents and Horatio. Basically interpeted the "human condition" bit as relative to both context and universal themes. I dunno, it looks like it could have been interpreted a heap of ways.

 

[kweese]

heaps late, but to the OP. Hamlet is betrayed that many times by his family and his friends that loyalty is one of the most relevant questions you could ever get for an hsc paper 2 on Hamlet. And his solilquies are testament to the effect of the betrayals. Of course it's testable

 

[hereyes]

by far my worst section.seriously.My argument was weird and probably not what the markers wanted:- through exploring human experience (i.e. the capacity of humanity for deception and the collective fear of death) it is not necessarily the significance of loyalty that is reinforced, but the importance of maintaining a 'balance' and of excercising judgement.just realised - I had no argument for the significance of loyalty!Importance of not being unjustifiably loyal to another:- Ophelia who IS loyal to Polonius, etc. does not have the opportunity to think for herself. Always controlled, etc.- Contrarily, Hamlet, who in a sense exhibits a 'lack' of loyalty to his father (in his delay in avenging his father) and his filial duty is able to gain an understanding of 'life', human nature, death, etc. i.e. *insert stuff on existential issues*- also reinforces to audience that not loyalty, but a capacity to use one's "god like reason" or "fair judgement without the which we are pictures or mere beasts"also talked about how misplaced belief in someone's loyalty can result in tragedy- King Hamlet trusting Claudius who was supposedly 'loyal' to him = HE'S DEAD.and THIS essay is not as well structured as it is here (even though here, it is still pretty dodgy). Jumped all over the place.Convoluted and embarrassing, to put it simply.what do you think is the max I can get for this load of.....?Trying to console myself with the possibility that a band 6 is still within reach.

 

[alexandraclaire]

worst possible question they could have chosen for Hamlet! grrrrr i didn't have any indepth imformation on loyalty AT ALL :|just wondering... it didn't say use other interpretations, but did everyone include them anyway? i did. hhmmm

 

[cirs]

Eh I found it alright. I did the loyalty between gertrude and hamlet, about hamlets loyalty to his father and how the lack of loyalty gertrude showed to his father. And about because of Hamlet's loyalty, he was driven to avenge his father etc. I made the question work for me.

Lol, exactly the same.

 

[jellybelly59]

to hereyes the maximum you can get if it's a brilliant essay is 14-16. hmm... i surprised no one wrote about the loyalty to one's own principles and ethics.... that's what i wrote about and i linked that to loyalty to religious principles and the consequences of the sacrilegious.

 

[shaon0]

Just looking back on the paper. It's possible to actually go against their interpretation and say it's not totally about loyalty. It might show a solid understanding and more unique interpretation of the play.

 

[jellybelly59]

Just looking back on the paper. It's possible to actually go against their interpretation and say it's not totally about loyalty. It might show a solid understanding and more unique interpretation of the play.

yes but you have to show in at least half of your response the small or minimal extent to which it is showing the significance of loyalty and the other half about why it isn't so to get a decent mark and that second half is pretty much the only place you can place in your own idea.

 

[smelnizzle]

yes but you have to show in at least half of your response the small or minimal extent to which it is showing the significance of loyalty and the other half about why it isn't so to get a decent mark and that second half is pretty much the only place you can place in your own idea.

+1
i said it is to a lesser extent loyalty is blahblah with the human experience.
it plays a minimal role in the essential portrayal of melancholy (my interpretation) *goes on to talk about it*
the times i mentioned loyalty again was how he becomes disloyal to certain ppl as a result of melancholy, but in the end! loyalty doesn't play a big role

 

[clare987]

I wrote that loyalty, or disloyalty and betrayal, was the whole reason for the play. It's Claudius's disloyalty that causes him to kill Hamlet Senior, it's Gertrude's disloyalty to her late husband that drives Hamlet nuts, etc, making Denmark 'rotten'. I also had fun with examples about how everyone who shows disloyalty dies lol, i.e. Gertrude - Hamlet Senior, Claudius - same, Ophelia - Polonius (by not doing as he asked by loving Hamlet who drives her mad), and Rozencrantz and Guildenstein - obviously Hamlet. Horatio, coz he was a loyal friend to Hamlet, 'lives to tell the tale' The resolution of the play is when poor Hamlet kicks off for hesitating in killing Claudius and the kinda suss way he obsesses over his mum (disloyalty to his father), but order is restored when Fortinbras takes over Denmark - a pretty loyal guy to his own dead father. Still think it sucked though - way to confining for an individual thesis. Markers probs got lazy this year, not wanting to mark so many different ideas

 

[Venetiad]

I did a reading (shiiit?) as Hamlet the Hero. Yeah, so I got it off wikipedia, but I did my own study for it too, so I'm not a lazy shit. Basically, I incorporated the idea of duty (to Denmark, to the Ancient Hero) as loyalty to those same focuses. I also incorporated the idea of Life/Death, but, I didn't really focus on loyalty there, but I did connect it to my reading. Not sure how I'm gonna go

 

[shaon0]

+1
i said it is to a lesser extent loyalty is blahblah with the human experience.
it plays a minimal role in the essential portrayal of melancholy (my interpretation) *goes on to talk about it*
the times i mentioned loyalty again was how he becomes disloyal to certain ppl as a result of melancholy, but in the end! loyalty doesn't play a big role

Yeah same. That's what i did, but i did it in relation to death, religion and melancholy. Depends on how the markers see the interpretation.

 

[spazamataz]

I totally disagreed with it. I said it was all about death and grief. LOL and i chucked the oedipal bit in as well, even though my view didnt support it!

 

[shaon0]

I totally disagreed with it. I said it was all about death and grief. LOL and i chucked the oedipal bit in as well, even though my view didnt support it!

Technically, it's 'your intepretation' and to what extent does your intepretation agree with the statement. So i think you're quite correct, you just need to be able to back it up. that's all

 

[monsters]

Madness is relative to interpretation and perception. Personally, I just think he's driven to extremities.

agreed heightened sense of consciousness.

 

[Tulii]

I totally disagreed with it. I said it was all about death and grief. LOL and i chucked the oedipal bit in as well, even though my view didnt support it!

I did sort of the same thing, but loyalty was apart of my thesis.

I provided an analysis of the other human experiences which I believe over shadow the loyalty idea and provided reasons and an explanation why. Thats how I tied in my textual integrity crap, readings etc and how exploration of existance and inaction uphold more relevance in a range of contexts.

I had a page on loyalty, but I didn't reinforce that it was a signifiant part, I used it as a juxtaposition with the other more significant human experiences, to show how insignificant it was in my interpretation.

I didn't have a prepared answer, it was my honest interpretation and if I get crapola for it, then so be it.

 

[naisAtoN]

I really liked this question. The 'themes' I generally focus on in my essays are appearance and reality (or 'duplicity'), duty/honour and moral responsibility. I think I managed to develop a thesis with these points relative to loyalty...

e.g. The disloyalty within the kingdom leads to disorder. This order is restored in the resolution when Fortinbras, loyal to his duty to his father, takes control of the kingdom. Hence Shakespeare communicates that loyalty is paramount to stability, etc etc.