About Shakespeare Essay Example for Free

About Shakespeare Essay Hamlet is Shakespeare’s longest and most tragic play. It was first published in 1603, from a draft published several years earlier. The play begins two months after the death of King Hamlet of Denmark. The country is in a state of unrest. Young Fortinbras of Norway is preparing for war. After the King’s death, his brother Claudius takes over the throne, and marries the widowed Queen Gertrude. Young Hamlet, the late king’s son is incensed. He is told by the ghost of his father, that Claudius had poisoned him, to become the King of Denmark. Hamlet starts acting like a madman rousing concern. Polonius, an advisor to King Claudius is also worried by Hamlet’s strange â€Å"transformation. † The two, along with Queen Gertrude instruct Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, Hamlet’s childhood friends to spy on him. Hamlet is also increasingly hostile towards his love, Ophelia, Polonius’ daughter. Out of fear, the King orders Hamlet to be sent to England. King Claudius and Polonius both feel that Hamlet is dangerous. To ensure who the culprit was, Hamlet cleverly changes the lines in a play which is performed before the king and the queen. See more: Is the Importance of being earnest a satirical play essay The King’s reaction convinces Hamlet that it was indeed he who poisoned his father. Alone, King Claudius reveals his crime, and confesses that he cannot escape divine judgment. After the play, Queen Gertrude scolds her son, but he instead scolds his mother for her wrong actions. Polonius is spying on the two, from behind a curtain. Hamlet hears Polonius, and kills him thinking he is Claudius. Anxious and scared, the king orders Hamlet to be sent to England, along with Rosencrantz and Guildenstern. The King wants Hamlet killed as soon as he arrives in England. Hamlet had the spies Rosencrantz and Guildenstern put to death instead. Meanwhile, Young Fortinbras has brought his army to Denmark. Hamlet admires Young Fortinbras, for his courage to fight for honor. The death of Polonius has a profound impact on Ophelia, who in her depression and apathy kills herself by drowning. Laertes, Polonius’ son is enraged. The king tells him that it was Hamlet who murdered Polonius. The two decide to get rid of Hamlet, their common enemy. Claudius and Laertes arrange a duel, in which Laertes will fight Hamlet. To ensure Hamlet’s death, Laertes poisons the tip of his sword. In the course of the duel, Laertes, Hamlet and the King are poisoned by the same sword. Queen Gertrude drinks a poisoned drink meant for Hamlet, and is killed. Dying, Hamlet tells Horatio to tell the world of his story and recommends Young Fortinbras the next king of Denmark. Hamlet – Prince of Denmark is a play that deals with the main subjects of honor, revenge and suicide. Hamlet is not our typical hero. Born in a royal family, he is a refined young man with noble attributes, but he has his weaknesses. After his father’s murder, he is driven mad by anger when his mother marries Claudius. His love for Ophelia too turned into a strange confusion and mix of emotions. He distrusts all those around him, and starts dwelling in a melancholy state of mind. Even those he thought were his friends turn out to be spies sent by the king and queen. This also explain Hamlets â€Å"insanity† to a great extent. But even so, Hamlet is a disturbed individual. The way he treats Ophelia is obvious evidence. He is cruel to her, in spite of her efforts to try and understand him. He is also impulsive – he kills Polonius without thinking twice. Justice and revenge form major themes of the play, with Claudius, at the Head of a country, having killed his own brother, and Hamlet, avenging his father’s death. Suicide also forms an essential theme in the play. Ophelia kills herself by drowning. Hamlet too is prompted to kill himself. † But should he, or not; â€Å"To be or not to be, that is the question. † Shakespeare portrays all the characters with great ingenuity. He analyses human psyche, and how eventually, everyone’s destiny is controlled by fate. References: About Shakespeare, Hamlet Study Guide, http://absoluteshakespeare. com/guides/hamlet/hamlet. htm

The Pardoner’s Tale of Chaucers Canterbury Tales :: Pardoners Tale

The Canterbury Tales - The Pardoner’s Tale   One might assume that the person telling the story has a lot to do with the story they're telling.   This is the case in the Geoffrey Chaucer's "The Canterbury Tales." In the tale of "The Pardoner's", the voice tells a tale dealing with his famous preach; "Radix malorum est Cupiditas."   In English, "The root of all evil is Greed." An ironic distinction can be made with what a "Pardoner" is known to be, the character (the voice/Pardoner), and the tale that he tells.   Through the Prologue of the Pardoner's Tale one can say that he lives up to his name.   As the â€Å"Webster† dictionary states, â€Å"a medieval ecclesiastic authorized to raise money for religious works by granting papal indulgences to contributors.† Pardoner's were known to be granters of the church.   Which in reality, they would keep all of the money given to them by generous people.   They were generally associated with being untrustworthy and sneaky.   In reality they did have a gift for preaching, but they didn’t exactly follow what they preach.   In the Prologue the Pardoner shows his true self. Chaucer, describes him as bad as he dislikes him.   Portraying him with having long, greasy, yellow hair, and also beardless ("The Pardoner's Tale".) The Pardoner revealing in the Prologue, that the only thing he cares about is money.   â€Å"I preach nothing except for gain† (Pardoner’s Tale.) Aside from being extremely greedy, he is also a hypocrite.   He preaches the one thing that he’s most guilty for. â€Å"Avarice is the most of all evil† (â€Å"The Pardoner’s Tale†.) The greed and hypocrisy is also shown in the tale that he tells.   Throughout the tale itself, the greed and hypocrisy that the Pardoner has, is also shown.   In the tale, three friends begin a Journey in order to kill death.   During their journey, they meet an old man that tells them where they can find a treasure.   He also warns them that in no way is it good treasure.   At this point in the tale, the three friends show their greed, and later their hypocrisy, by planning to kill the other to keep the treasure.   Eventually, that greed and hypocrisy leads to their downfall.

Race Based Jury Nullification Essay

Jury nullification can generally be termed as the act by a jury who even though is convinced that a defendant is guilty of the charges he or she is accused of, decides to give out or acquit him or her of the charges for the jury’s own reasons (Brandy R. 2006). Jury nullification or for that matter can be defined as a process whereby the jury(s) nullifies â€Å"unfair laws by declaring guilty defendants not guilty†. On the other hand race based jury nullification involves the process of a jury acquitting an individual based on his or her race. This kind of cases is usually found in homogenous cases where the diversity of the jury is nil or very little. Earlier cases that include runaway slave laws as well as the present day cases like police shootings indicate that race based nullification is still a modern day courtroom issue. The nullification process usually takes place in the event that a criminal trial decides not to convict a defendant in spite of full proof of guilt due to the belief and view by jurors that the law is unfair or at certain times that there is an unjustly application of the said law. The basis of the nullification can be said, thus, to be â€Å"the unjustness of the law†, the application of the same law on the basis of race of a party. Additionally there are instances where cases that involve the terminally ill persons in the society are often given leniency by the jurors, when they do drugs due to their condition. The issue often is not just about nullification per se but at times is based and as such has brought a lot o debate on its essence in view of the law as well as ethics. In this paper, I will discuss the issue of race based jury nullification, its limitations as well as its merits. Finally I will evaluate the relevance of race based jury nullification in our present day society. Race based jury nullification Race based jury nullification involves the process of a jury knowingly acquitting a defendant based on his or her race and with the full knowledge that the defendant is guilty. There are empirical studies, which have shown that about 3 to 4 percent of jury criminal trails have been connected to jury nullification. The dilemma that the situation presents is overwhelming, considering that there exists no chance to stop the process of jury nullification as jurors and are never ordered or forced to convict defendants and also there is also no clause in law that makes it punishable for the juror to acquit someone. The overlying principle function of the jury is that it should complete the law, if necessary through the recognition of fundamentals of justification that traverses beyond the written laws of the land and not to â€Å"nullify† the instructions given by the judge. The focal point of reference when the jurors give the â€Å"not guilty† verdict and in the process is the issue of unjust nature of the law. Pros and cons Depending on which side of the debate you are on, this issue has both the ugly and the good side. There are various reasons why race based jury nullification has encountered criticisms even by its ardent supporters. One, the case can be used for majority cases, that is in instances where the jury consists largely of persons from the same race can effectively acquit one of their â€Å"own† (defendant from the same race). For instance, a largely constituted black jury would free a black American even tough she or he has committed a severe crime. Thus in view of the law, when a dangerous individual is acquitted on the basis of his or her race sets a bad precedence (Jemal, 1997). There are instances when white jurors have acquitted fellow whites through the process of jury nullification while in the face of it the said defendants actually engaged in an illegality that either harmed black or brown people in America. There are also instances when black jurors have freed fellow blacks on the basis of their races while they committed either a racial act or a severe crime. This has not helped the just course of the due process, blacks, whites as well as other races have engaged in the race based jury nullification, something that does not portend well for rules of the law. The nature with which the voting is normally done by the jurors is usually that of conscience, to an extent this is a total disrespect if not abuse of the laws of this land. When someone who is supposedly guilty is acquitted, this is tantamount to nullification of the very law. They are supposed to protect and on whose basis the jury even came into existence. Jury nullification has the potential to turn an otherwise coherent and cohesive society or state into some hostile, incoherent or even lead to civil strife. This is because when serious acts are committed, and rulings are based on races, the respective races may gang up against each other. It seems to be a defeat process in the face of the law that should be the guardian and protector of all. The most often conclusion drawn is usually that nullification is an integral part of power, which is essential for the checks and balances of the judicial system. Jury nullification has and will continue to play a dual role in the history of our country. There are certain instances in our history that jury nullification has proved to be a useful tool. For instance, in those cases that involved slavery or differential prosecution at certain instances let racist to go unabated. There is the possibility that over use of this power together with other real or imagined risks that it possess would be enormous if everyone were to understand and be aware of it. However, the absence of it would put and vest too much power with the executive and surely everyone else understands the consequences of excessive unbalanced power exercised by the government versus the power of the common citizens. Conclusion Overall, the race based jury nullification has been, still is and would always be a very highly debatable topic, whether one supports it or he or she is against it. In each and every argument put forward by anyone in the society for or against jury nullification process, there are strong, valid opinions and facts in support of the various respective reasons that cannot just be wished away. Having evaluated the situation, and with a critical analysis of the basis of the law of our great country, I came to a conclusion that with due respect the good job the jurors have done so far, the race based jury nullification should not be conducted or at least cordoned by the jurors. This does not mean that I am in anyway opposing or rejecting the whole idea of jury nullification. However, if the element of race becomes apart of the whole equation, then I strongly call for its ban. In my opinion and understanding of our history I believe jury nullification based on a defendant’s race does not promote unity within communities at any level. Considering the tremendous efforts our country has made towards a harmonious community and with the effort various personalities have put in educating and sensitizing people on how negative race based ideas has and can be. I believe the whole process is discriminatory and basically racial to the people in our society. This does not in any way mean that individuals should be ashamed of their races and promotes the values and ideals they stand for, but when a defendant is found guilty or innocent on the basis of the law by the jurors based on his or her race alone then there is a problem. Either the problem is with the law or our society but none of us wants either of these two scenarios. The basis for any juror’s decision should be facts, information as well as evidence that they receive throughout the trail. Jurors prejudices be it racial or otherwise should be left at their door steps before they get into the streets leave alone the courtrooms. Reference: Brandy Rivera, 2006, Race based jury nullification. Associated Content Cato Books 1999: Jurors Should Know Their Rights: A historical look at jury independence Jemal, 1997, Race Based Jury Nullification: A Path To Equality! http://www. geocities. com/athens/olympus/1320/nullification. htm Scheflin, Alan W. , (1999) California Bar Journal, Point Counter Point – Is it ever proper for juries to ignore or reinterpret the law? , Retrieved September 28, 2007 from http://www. calbar. ca. gov/calbar/2cbj/99mar/page14-1. htm

Beloved As A Character Defies Classification.She Is Both

Beloved as a character defies classification. She is both the light and the dark, an all-encompassing duality that forces Sethe to recognize pain from her past, as well as deal with new pain in the present. Beloved’s shocking reappearance forces Sethe and others to confront old, painful memories whilst concurrently reconciling who or what Beloved is. For many, the character of Beloved embodies multiple generations of slavery and symbolizes the horrors of the past – seemingly back from the dead she haunts Sethe, Denver, and anyone else that is unfortunate enough to encounter the family. â€Å"Beloved, she my daughter. She mine† (236). If only Sethe had realized that Beloved was a replacement for her baby earlier in the novel – Beloved†¦show more content†¦She is not simply a reincarnation of Sethe’s lost baby, but a replacement for her. In Her, Samantha, an Artificially Intelligent Operating System downloaded and customized by Theo, act s similarly as a replacement for Theo’s former wife Catherine, though Samantha is an independent entity. In this case, she is a carrier of happiness and a reminder of past good times. Heartbroken in the beginning of the film, Theo downloads Samantha; he once again finds a human-like connection in someone, or something rather that is as far from human as possible. Theo’s relationship with Samantha is synonymous with Beloved and Sethe’s relationship. In both cases, Samantha and Beloved temporarily fill a void within the protagonist. With Samantha, Theo seemingly finds his â€Å"perfect† woman; someone who shares his interests, someone he can talk to and confide in, someone who loves him, insecurities and all. Likewise, Beloved’s reappearance is originally more shocking for those around Sethe than Sethe herself. Once Sethe realizes who Beloved is, a wave of emotions crash over her and she devotes herself to Beloved (beginning the process of dea ling with her past). However, Beloved causes pain for those in her presence. She forces Paul D to recount stories about Sweet Home, and to Sethe about how Halle was left behind, a husk of his former self; the story about Halle being