On March 22nd, Dr. Sexon asked the class to specifically begin making connections between William Shakespeare’s Hamlet and the Bhagavad-Gita. Now I am a slacker when it comes to writing these things, so I hope you’ll excuse my tardiness. I began my study by making broad comparisons of the two texts, just to provide myself with some sort of map to help guide my way. I first define the ‘main’ characters of each text. Hamlet is a tragic hero, and Arjuna is a warrior, and, to both, honor is a huge concern. I also identified the idea that both characters are facing inner struggles.
In the spirit of the class, I began to make connections to other classes, which the inner struggles spurred me to do. Harold Bloom writes in his The Anxiety of Influence “I never meant by “the anxiety of influence” a Freudian Oedipal rivalry despite a rhetorical flourish or two in this book. A Shakespearean reading of Freud, which I favor over a Freudian reading of Shakespeare or anyone else, reveals that Freud suffered from a Hamlet complex (the true name of the Oedipus Complex) or an anxiety of influence in regard to Shakespeare” (xxii). Bloom’s views of the ‘Hamlet Complex’ in conjunction with Freud, I believe, are directly tied to interiority, which Bloom is a HUGE advocate for. The inner struggles that Hamlet faced were revolutionary because of the interiority, whereas Arjuna must wear his emotions on his sleeve in order for the audience to gather what he is actually feeling; however, Krishna helps Arjuna through the ‘inner battlefield,’ so there is some interiority.
As I state earlier, in both texts, honor is important. It seems like honor is both held for its ethical value, but it also a social value as well (I would like to argue that Hamlet’s call to honor for the murder of a kinsman is a more complex form than Arjuna’s warrior honor, which lends itself to Bloom’s interiority theories). This is similar to the shame cultures that we’ve learned about in previous Oral Traditions and Classical Foundations classes. In the latter class, I must point out, that a hero is defined as a being who is half divine and half mortal. In later literature, the word protagonist seems to be a better fit as is defined in “A Handbook to Literature 10th ed.” as
The chief character in a work. The word was originally applied to the ‘first’ actor in early Greek drama. The actor was added to the CHORUS and was its leader; hence, the continuing meaning of protagonist as the ‘first’ or chief payer. In Greek drama an AGON is a contest. The protagonist and the ANTAGONIST, the second most important character, are the contesteants. In Shakespeare’s Hamlet, Hamlet is himself the protagonist, as his fortunes are the chief interest of the play. King Claudius and Laertes are his ANTAGONISTS. (Harmon 419)
To continue with the Classical theme being applied to Hamlet, I also want to look at The Poetics for a definition of tragedy. Aristotle says,
Tragedy is an imitation of an action that is admirable, complete and possesses magnitude; in language made pleasurable, each of its species separated in a different parts; performed by actors, not through narration; effecting trhough pity and fear the purification of such emotions. (10)
In my previous blog, the Oral Traditions class can be linked into all of this by looking at this website, which as the Bhagavad-Gita performed in various languages:
http://www.bhagavad-gita.us/articles/664/1/The-Bhagavad-Gita-In-Audio/Page1.html
So here is my start. More to come
No comments:
Post a Comment