| Papers [1-14] of 100 :: [Page 1 of 8] | | Go to page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 —> | Search results on "HAMLET MACHIAVELLI": |
|
|
Hamlet and Machiavelli, 2002.
A Machiavellian perspective on William Shakespeare's "Hamlet".
900 words (approx. 3.6 pages), 3 sources, £ 25.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This piece is a analysis of Shakespeare's "Hamlet" in Machiavellian terms. The assignment is to either take a Christian or Machiavellian analysis of Hamlet's actions. The author's thesis, instead of jumping on one side or the other, includes both; the argument presented is that while Hamlet's goal of redeeming his dead father's soul is ultimately Christian, his means of doing so are Machiavellian. The author argues this point of view by first giving an overview of Machiavellian philosophy, then showing how Hamlet's actions and words evidence a consistency with that. The author closes by discussing how the play's final act culminates in actions both Christian and Machiavellian.
| |
|
Shakespeare?s ?Hamlet?, 2004.
This paper discusses Shakespeare?s ?Hamlet?, based on Machiavelli?s ?The Prince?.
995 words (approx. 4.0 pages), 2 sources, MLA, £ 25.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explains that the story of ?Hamlet? illustrates Machiavelli's ?The Prince?, as Hamlet is a good character; with this goodness, becoming a downfall because he cannot make the rational decision not to be good, even when he knows that not being good is required. The author points out that the soliloquy, ?To be, or not to be?, refers to Hamlet?s decision whether to commit murder, with that evil act actually ending the troubles, or whether to be good and not commit murder, with that meaning that the trouble will continue. The paper concludes that, in the end, it is Hamlet?s inability to make a decision that leads to his downfall.
From the Paper
"Hamlet?s state of indecision then only ends when Hamlet is angered by his belief that Claudius is spying on him. It is in his anger that Hamlet makes the snap decision to kill Claudius. However, Hamlet mistakes Claudius for Polonius, and so kills Polonius instead. This is the turning point of the play that leads to the tragic ending. The important point about Hamlet?s decision to kill Claudius is that he does not really make the rational decision. Instead, his decision is only made when he is angered enough that his rational good side is overcome by his irrational side."
| |
|
"The Prince' by Niccolo Machiavelli, 2005.
This paper reviews "The Prince' by Niccolo Machiavelli, which christened Machiavelli as the father of modern politics and his writings as the hallmark of power politics.
1,420 words (approx. 5.7 pages), 0 sources, £ 33.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explains that, using a twist of a literary genre of the era--cloaking and imparting his beliefs based on current events of the time, "The Prince' by Niccolo Machiavelli is an illustration of Machiavelli's duplicity of hiding an alternative belief and motive beneath its rhetoric of monarchical rights, privileges and purposes. The author relates that, in "The Prince", Machiavelli details the life a ruling prince, who was purportedly Lorenzo d'Medici, should lead by integrating his knowledge of common society and human behavior. The paper reports that Machiavelli emphasizes certain character traits in a ruler, which must be served in order to gain an even greater advantage: A man must feed his ambition, match the abilities of previous men of greatness, and be ready to seize any opportunity just as Moses, Romulus, and Cyrus did.
From the Paper
"Machiavelli's supposed objective in "The Prince" is to illustrate how political principles can be implemented and manipulated to gain and maintain political power. He is not concerned about the suffering, death, or financial ruin his course of actions metes out on the social classes lower than the royal line. "The Prince" is a grand example of "the end justifies the means". Whatever means are necessary for a prince to rise and maintain political power must be accomplished. In the game of "power politics", there is no room for the faint of heart, justice for all, or lack of aggression. Power will be gained through the advantages of boldness, audacity, genocide if need be, and annihilation of opposing rulers and their familial lines."
| |
|
"Hamlet", 2005.
An analysis of William Shakespeare's play, "Hamlet," with a focus on Hamlet's fear of culpability.
1,198 words (approx. 4.8 pages), 1 source, MLA, £ 29.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses the play, "Hamlet," by William Shakespeare, claiming that the fear of culpability and having to answer to the community is much greater for Hamlet than fear of the law and even fear of God. The paper contends that, by virtue of answering only to an abstract other, Hamlet answers only to himself. The paper explains that his fear of being held responsible is a fear mediated by an unspecified community that is never seen, yet never disregarded. The absence of a specific general community shows that the culpability Hamlet so fears is as unfixed and intangible to him as his own personality.
From the Paper
"Shakespeare's play Hamlet presents the audience with a protagonist who defines himself by what he does not want to be. When pressed towards action, Hamlet will often think less about what to do and more often about how what he will do is to be perceived by others. This persistent reliance upon definition of character through the negation of action seems to be tied to Hamlet's fear of culpability that, like the ghost of his father, haunts him throughout the course of the play. This is quite an immature posture for a thirtysomething Prince, and indeed can easily be read as childishness. The nature of his childishness is not the simply the result of immaturity, however, but the result of a growing concern about light being cast on the horrible revenge he thinks about and acts towards achieving but never fully does. Hamlet's fear of being seen as a culpable entity, particularly in the case of his desire to murder Claudius, causes problems because it makes him impotent to action and this impotence makes him a wildly unfocused character who is, in the final estimation, deeply shallow."
| |
|
"Hamlet": Act III Scene II, 2002.
This paper is an analysis of William Shakespeare's "Hamlet,", and goes into detail about Hamlet's elaborate plan to expose the king as the murderer of his father.
1,185 words (approx. 4.7 pages), 0 sources, £ 28.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This is an analysis of the play "Hamlet" by William Shakespeare. Special attention is paid to the scene where the real murderer of the king is divulged. The author explains how this is a pivotal scene as it solves the mystery that has been building up until that point.
From the paper:
"Act III, Scene II is important for a number of reasons. Essentially, it is the start of the second half of the play. It could be argued that the first half of the play is when Hamlet sets up his strategy to avenge his father?s death. Naturally, the second half would then be Hamlet taking the vengeance he so baldy wants. Unfortunately for nearly all parties involved, it does not happen how he planned. In Act III Scene II, Claudius? guilt as well as his moral values had been exposed for all to see. Hamlet?s underhanded slyness was also revealed by his non-confrontational means of proving the king?s role in the murder of his father. Lastly, the reader also discovers the queen?s apparent innocence."
| |
|
"Hamlet", 2004.
An analysis of William Shakespeare's "Hamlet," with a focus on Hamlet's oedipal complex.
2,200 words (approx. 8.8 pages), 5 sources, MLA, £ 48.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper reviews the play, "Hamlet," by William Shakespeare. The paper contends that "Hamlet" is a complex play and can support a wide variety of interpretations. The paper describes one aspect of the psychology of the main character that harks back to the ancient world and the story of Oedipus, who was ordained to kill his father and marry his mother, which he unwittingly did. This story would later serve as a source for Sigmund Freud as he developed his oedipal theory, and the paper explores a similar idea that is played out by Hamlet in terms of his mother and father. The paper explains that Hamlet does not kill his own father, but he does have to kill his step-father at the behest of the ghost of his father and plays out the idea of sexual jealousy because his mother has remarried.
From the Paper
"In Hamlet as in other Elizabethan drama, the fate of kings is tied to the order of the universe, and dissension and tension in one is reflected in the other. Yet, the issue is complex, and while the usurper has no right to rule, it is not always clear who has the right to prevent him from ruling. The hesitation of Hamlet, much commented on by critics, may derive from the fact that while he knows Claudio to be a regicide, to kill Claudio would make him a regicide as well. The usurpation of the throne leads to a more dangerous and uncertain environment in the land, and nature concurs by expressing through storms and other travails visited upon the people that a great political wrong is also a great moral and religious wrong. The effects of a regicide are seen in storms and the like because such actions offend the gods, or God."
| |
|
"Hamlet", 2007.
An analysis of William Shakespeare's "Hamlet", focusing on Hamlet's delay in killing Claudius.
2,319 words (approx. 9.3 pages), 4 sources, MLA, £ 50.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explores why Hamlet delayed the revenge of his father's death by killing Claudius, in William Shakespeare's play, "Hamlet". The author examines several possible explanations about why Hamlet did not take immediate revenge including fear of becoming king, suffering from an Oedipus complex, fear of the ghost and other factors that may have played a part in Hamlet's reluctance to exact revenge on the man who killed his father.
From the Paper
"Along those same lines have been arguments that Hamlet was mentally stable but to weak minded to make a decision as strong as deciding to commit murder. This theory is not one that is easily supported however because he shows in many instances during the play that he can make a decision when he needs to. He also does not display weakness when he first begins killing characters. Whatever caused him to delay in the killing of his stepfather probably had more to do with the task of killing Claudius than the act of killing in itself."
| |
|
Theme of Insanity in Hamlet, 2006.
This paper discusses the theme of insanity in the character Hamlet in the tragedy of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark by William Shakespeare.
675 words (approx. 2.7 pages), 3 sources, £ 18.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
In this paper, the writer demonstrates that Hamlet has ultimately realized true insanity, as he has acted out his madness in a disguise that has failed on a large scale. The writer discusses that in this manner, the critical views of Grady offer greater insight into a psychological case for insanity for Hamlet in the play. The writer also shows that critic Harold Bloom does show a variety of behaviors that might present Hamlet's insanity as a disguise.
From the Paper
"This study reveals critical theory and interpretation that often revolves the character Hamlet in William Shakespeare's play The Tragedy of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark. By assessing modern critical theory on Hamlet's character, one can understand that many critics agree on Hamlet's insanity within the play, and how this links to his own tragic fate in the play. By offering different theoretical analysis of this aspect of Hamlet's character, we can understand why psychology--via madness and insanity--are how twentieth century critics view Shakespeare's portrayal of Hamlet in critical perspectives. In the first appearance of the Ghost (Hamlet's dead father) in the beginning of the play, reveal the first delusional image that Hamlet receives."
| |
|
Hamlet and Laertes, 2005.
A study of the relationship of Hamlet and Laertes in 'Hamlet' by William Shakespeare.
675 words (approx. 2.7 pages), 3 sources, £ 18.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper studies the character of Laertes as a foil or mirror image of the character Hamlet. Throughout the play, Laertes actions and responses seem to be a mirror of the character, Hamlet, both physically and verbally.
From the Paper
"In William Shakespeare's tragedy of 'Hamlet', the character of Laertes can be seen as a foil or a mirror of the protagonist Hamlet. This comparison extends throughout the play, as Laertes' responses to the murder of his father Polonius, the death of his sister Ophelia, and even his general philosophy of life can be interpreted not simply a mirroring of Hamlet but as a sort of running commentary on Hamlet's words and actions. In this context, this essay will argue that Shakespeare employs Laertes as a dramatic foil to Hamlet, allowing audiences more illuminating insights into the character and actions of the protagonist."
| |
|
Hamlet and Easy Rawlins, 2004.
Comparison of two famous literary characters, Hamlet from Shakespeare's "Hamlet" and Easy Rawlins from Walter Mosley's "Devil in a Blue Dress".
1,295 words (approx. 5.2 pages), 2 sources, MLA, £ 30.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper compares the literary devices used by William Shakespeare in developing the character of Hamlet with those used by Walter Mosley in developing the character of Easy Rawlins.
From the Paper
"The protagonist in Walter Mosley's Devil in a Blue Dress, Easy Rawlins, is a good man; however; he is motivated by his desires for money and sex. Shakespeare wrote Hamlet as a parody of the classical drama, heightening, and thereby questioning, the code of honor. Mosley was parodying the detective genre to encompass the Black viewpoint. Easy stumbles through the world of the detective, falling for the wrong women, backing down from confrontations and, generally, allowing the circumstance to define his movements."
| |
|
"Hamlet" and "Oedipus the King", 2005.
Character analysis of Prince Hamlet in "Hamlet" by William Shakespeare and Oedipus in ?Oedipus King? by Sophocles.
807 words (approx. 3.2 pages), 1 source, APA, £ 20.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
In this paper, a character analysis of both Prince Hamlet and Oedipus is conducted, arguing that both characters have exhibited tragic flaws that ultimately determined their downfall in life.
From the Paper
"In Aristotle?s literary discourse, ?Poetics,? he discusses his theory of tragedy, wherein he introduces the concepts of tragic flaw or ?hamartia,? which serves as the catalyst for the protagonist?s downfall or the tragedy of the story to happen. He determines a tragedy as a ?drama? that brings about a ?sorrowful conclusion, arousing fear and pity in the audience? (Roberts and Jacobs, 1998:1189). Tragic stories are identified through three (3) characteristics or elements: first, the protagonist, usually a male, must be of noble stature; second, the protagonist or tragic hero must possess a tragic flaw or ?hamartia? that shall become his downfall at the end of the story; and third, the hero?s downfall must come with a self-realization on his part, making him a ?reformed? individual even if a tragic outcome happens to him."
| |
|
Shakespeare's "Hamlet", 2005.
This paper discusses that in Shakespeare's "Hamlet", the character Ophelia is the most innocent victim of Hamlet's revenge.
935 words (approx. 3.7 pages), 0 sources, £ 23.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explains that, in Shakespeare's "Hamlet", Hamlet and Ophelia's relationship is a complex one, forming and developing as results of death, love, obedience and an Oedipus complex. The author points out that there are many similarities between Ophelia and Gertrude; Hamlet's love and sudden dependence on Ophelia may be an attempt to get closer to his mother as a result of the Oedipus complex. The paper concludes that, even in death, Ophelia has a large part in Hamlet's life because Hamlet's death was ultimately caused by Ophelia's death when the graveyard scene, in which Hamlet proclamation, "I loved Ophelia", leads to his fatal duel with Laertes.
From the Paper
""One fair daughter and no more,/The which he loved passing well," Hamlet sings at Polonius, mocking his supposed love for his daughter. Hamlet also calls him "Jephthah, judge of Israel." As told in Judges 11, Jephthah promises God that if he wins in battle he will sacrifice whatever comes out of the doors of his house when he returns. After he wins the battle, his only daughter hears of his victory and comes out to meet him. He keeps his promise to God. Hamlet's implication is that Polonius, like Jephthah, will sacrifice Ophelia for his own advantage."
| |
|
Machiavelli the Religious Humanist, 2006.
This paper examines the life and accomplishments of philosopher Niccolo Machiavelli while also defining the true meaning of humanism and its relevance to Machiavelli's view on religion and the world in general.
2,516 words (approx. 10.1 pages), 6 sources, MLA, £ 54.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper presents clear and specific examples and lessons learned by Machiavelli which greatly impacted his views on life and religion which garnered him a reputation as a brilliant and well respected philosopher. The writer of this paper contends and proves that Machiavelli was also a religious humanist by focusing on his impact and involvement in both the political and religious arenas. This paper examines the early roots of humanism and religious humanism which have been traced back to the Renaissance era. This paper defines humanism as a naturalistic view that rejects the supernatural or ideas that cannot be proven by logic or science. This paper examines the views and opinions of Machiavelli who clearly thought things through very much in style associated with the humanistic philosophy which promotes self thought and reflection, while urging others to think for themselves.
Table of Contents:
Introduction
Niccolo Machiavelli
Humanist
Machiavelli as a Humanist
Conclusion
Works Cited
From the Paper
"Machiavelli would certainly concur with the notion that religion creates distortions and ironies. But Humanists as a group also have underlying problems within their own ranks because they do not agree on certain facts. For example, Modern Humanism splits into two sub-categories, secular and religious. The dispute is between these factions. "The fact is that many Protestants, Catholics, and Jews--along with secular humanists--believe in and teach the theory of evolution in biology courses." Ironically, Secular and Religious Humanists seem to share similar worldviews and therefore follow similar principles which was confirmed when each factions created and signed the Humanist Manifesto I in 1933 and the revision in 1973. Religious Humanists who are secular have an understanding that human beings do have personal and social needs."
| |
|
Hamlet's Identity, 2004.
An analysis of Hamlet's unstable identity in a disjointed society in William Shakespeare's plat "Hamlet".
751 words (approx. 3.0 pages), 0 sources, £ 18.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines Hamlets identity as exposed through the soliloquies from William Shakespeare's play of the same name. It explores how Hamlet?s identity is defined by his existence and how from his very birth on, his identity was built to fit for his future as a king. It looks at how Claudius takes old Hamlets life and bestows himself upon the throne causing Hamlets identity to be severely endangered, which emphasizes the disjointedness of the society they live in. It also shows how, as Hamlet searches for his true identity, he is seeking to revenge his father?s death and how only by taking action, can Hamlet define his true identity of being of royal descent, with the right to be King of Denmark.
From the Paper
"Hamlet would have been king of England, were it not for the jealous uncle who so to speak stole the throne from him. There is truly only one way, in which Hamlet can get back his identity, and that is to take his place on the throne. Essentially, the fact that his father was murdered becomes only a secondary reason in the development of his identity. As it becomes visible towards the end of the play, it is ultimately not the fact that his father was killed, but rather that his rightful position was stolen from him, which caused him to find himself in this identity crisis. Alone the fact that Hamlet, from the very beginning on, disproves of his uncles actions; at a point where Hamlet was not yet aware of his fathers murder, underlines and provides evidence for the fact that Hamlet?s revenge is only a cover for other motives, so to say to justify his murder of Claudius."
|
|
|
