We finished reading Rosencrantz
and Guildenstern are Dead and I enjoyed reading Hamlet, but I unfortunately
cannot express similar feelings for this play. While this play has a
deeper meaning I found it difficult to look beyond the constant repetition,
short, static lines, and the immaturity of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern.
Even though reading the play was not the most enjoyable it was
interesting to see the connection to Hamlet. For example in
both plays the characters are indecisive, but in Rosencrantz and
Guildenstern are Dead, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern lack direction while
Hamlet has aid from his deceased father. Hamlet also speaks in prose and
then in verse depending on whom he is speaking to. The same applies to
Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, they speak in modern English unless they are
speaking to Claudius and Gertrude and they say what they think Claudius and
Gertrude wish to hear.
Aside from Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead we have been
working on forum posts and poems from our textbook. I actually like doing
these. Reading the articles or passages isn't difficult and I find that
it is a good way to practice analyzing a piece and then organizing my thoughts
into an analysis. I'm sure this will be helpful for the AP exam, and I like
reading my peers' analysis because it gives me a new way to look at the article
or passage. For analyzing the piece I like to first read it for a general
understanding, and then I reread it to find symbols, personalities of
characters, allusions, etc. This helps me formulate my thoughts and
general topic for my analysis.
Honestly, I kinda liked the play! The constant repetition did really get annoying after a while, but I thought that (at least in our hour), the reading of it was fun. You draw some good connections to Hamlet as well, which I couldn't really see for some reason, I don't really know why. I agree with you on the analysis thing, too, because it's kind of cool to have things suddenly click in your head as you look at a piece.
ReplyDelete