King Lear with Nature

King Lear evidently has a close relationship with nature; he screams to the vicious storm in Act III, challenging the storm clouds as Deities. As said by a gentleman, Lear is "contending with the elements" in Act III scene i, in rage addressing nature. He also laments his grievances against his daughters to the storm, personifying it in the process.

It is apparent that Lear initially resents nature for making it possible that his daughters are ungrateful: "Crack Nature's molds, all germens spill at once, That make ingrateful man!" He challenged and despises nature. However, his emotions shift as he tells Nature that he is weak and despised, and that he does not heap his unkindness on it; in this light, Nature seems to become a sort of therapist for Lear. It seems all the more a "therapist" when Lear, in a brief monologue in Act III scene iv, "This tempest will not give me leave to ponder on things would hurt me more." Lear admits he is preoccupied by the raging storm so much so that he is distracted by what troubles him most, therefore the storm-- and nature-- benefits his wits.

Lear's perceptions of nature lean in two separate directions, depending upon the state of his senility at different points in time. When most furious and senile, Lear does not fear the wrath and cold of the storm-- he stands hatless in the pouring rain, and once with Edgar, tears at his clothes despite the pervasive cold mentioned previously. When his wits are about him, such as when he is lead by Kent to the hovel, Lear seems to recognize the perniciousness of the brutal storm. He comments on the chill and even dives into a speech about how unfortunate people are forgotten and beaten by the storm while others carry on about there lives. His recognition and humility by the storm comes only infrequently, however, and in general, the senile old man neither fears nor reveres the storm, and in effect, Nature. He instead treats Nature as a venue to which he can emote and bemoan his life.

Frost Explication: Bereft, with King Lear

Robert Frost's poem Bereft is a duality of a storm's brutal reality and a metaphorically berating loneliness, working side-by-side in uses of extensive imagery and other rhetorical devices. The imagery depicts a storm, in "somber clouds" and the angry, "frothy shore." Yet, the underlying theme of loneliness is insinuated by the personification of the elements of the storm: leaves hiss and strike like a serpent. The personification detracts from the realistic depictions of the storm, allowing the reader/listener to expect that the storm is also a metaphor for Frost's loneliness. 

Through personified imagery, Frost addresses the roaring winds and coiled leaves tossed by the storm as being able to receive "word" of his loneliness, and the anger and brooding that the storm appears to possess, shown in particular choices of diction such as "roar" and "frothy", mirror what Frost feels towards the fact that he is bereft of human company or perhaps love. He, emoting vicariously through the storm, expresses his displeasure as well as his apparent unease at his state, reflected in his reference to the "sinister" tone of the storm. 

Lastly, it is possible that Frost, revealed by the final line of the poem, is addressing God in referencing the storm. His tone is somewhat accusatory towards God, as he transitions from speaking of being "in the house alone" to being in his "life alone," apparently pointing towards God that he is alone in the metaphorical house of life, battered by a storm of loneliness and anger. 

The themes of this poem closely mirror King Lear's experience during Act III in which he, disillusioned, angry, and possibly even frightened, cries to the raging storm-- and in effect, to his gods. Lear is also accusatory and distressed over the fact that he feels betrayed by his daughters, loveless, and lonely-- emotions likely similar to those bemoaned by Frost in his poem Bereft. Lear, like Frost, personifies the storm around him, revealing that for him, the storm presents as a metaphor for his own troubled emotions and as God. 

King Lear: His Daughter's Differences, Act I

Thus far, two of King Lear's three daughters-- Goneril and Regan-- are largely lumped together, and are not specifically differentiates as characters with differing motivations, emotions, or personalities. However, the youngest, Cordelia, differs greatly from her two sisters in most regards.

Cordelia is evidently hailed as the most morally pure and lofty of the three. She, unlike her sisters, loves her father in a way that is deep enough so that she recognizes the nature of her love for him. She understands her love enough such that she knows she cannot degrade it by putting into words her immense love, and she knows she must be honest in that her love will divide to include a future husband. This her sister's neglect.

Goneril and Regan may be perceived as having selfish personalities since their outward motivation is to obtain a dowry by declaring their love for their father. However, the two sisters may simply have personalities which value obedience and conformity, unlike Cordelia, which could be viewed as positive. Alas, their benevolently obedient personalties are undermined by their determination to 'do something' about their senile father. In this way, Goneril and Regan appear to be hypocritical, for after having expressed their boundless love for their father, they conspire against him. Cordelia, at least, is quite the opposite of hypocritical, as she takes her loving stance towards her father and remains firmly by it despite the consequences.

Goneril's character is delved into further in Act I, and she appears to be increasingly hypocritical in her conspiring against her father-- or, is Goneril nobly and cleverly fighting against her unjust father in an active way, which Cordelia could not do, having been banished? Goneril drives her father to guilt and great agitation by means of trickery. Cordelia, meanwhile, drives her father to agitation by honesty. Here, the personalities and emotions of Goneril (and Regan, though she is less expressed in Act I) are, to my belief, most clearly juxtaposed with those of Cordelia. Cordelia is honest, fair, loving, and realistic, and resolute, motivated by love and virtue, while her sisters are irresolute, hypocritical, and conspiratory, and are driven by motives of much lesser nobility: want of possession.

Poetry Explication: Meeting at Night

Meeting at Night, a poem by Robert Browning, is a brief poem which recalls a meeting at night between lovers. First and foremost, simply the time of day itself suggests excitement and the forbidden. Shrouded by the dark of night, the narrator is freed to mention his love and to experience it freely through the poem.

Evidently, a great deal of imagery is implicated throughout the poem, in part demonstrating Browning's unsaid assertion that being in love transforms the world into a beautiful thing. As a whole, Browning interlaces warm, fiery imagery with cool, dark images in order to create a mood of the poem which is excited yet quieted at the same time.

The poem commences with "the gray sea and the long black land,"(1), the first of the darker images which imply secrecy in the romance. A yellow half-moon which appears in the second line, large and low like a lantern, reveals the rendez-vous of the lovers warmly, by contrast. The narrator proceeds to personify the "little waves", which leap with a start, a combination of secrecy (for the waves are startled by the presence of the narrator, supposedly) and excitement. The last image that concludes the first stanza indicates that the narrator is willing to trudge through "slushy sand" in order to reach his lover, demonstrating his devotion.

The second stanza is a continuation of alternating images between secrecy and loving excitement, intermingled with indications of the narrator's dedication in crossing "three fields" and "a mile," all to reach his lover. The beach is "warm-scented," while excitement appears with the "tap at the pane," and a "blue spurt" from a match lit by his lover. Line 11 condenses the primary themes of the poem by mentioning the "joys and fears" of the lovers, intermixing the two to define the nature of love. The final line of the poem, telling that their hearts beat together loudly, exemplifies their excitement and nervousness and their passion as well.

Rating of Characters of Hamlet from Most Loving to Least Loving

The character in Hamlet most devoted to love is outstandingly Ophelia, who ultimately goes mad and possibly commits suicide due to love. After Hamlet frightens her away with his madness and her father is murdered, Ophelia becomes delusional and sings of lost love. Her love is uncompromised, for she displays no ulterior motives for her despair.

Laertes follows behind his sister due to his undivided love for his family. His singular goal of revenge in the end of the play and his rage and distress over the deaths of his father and Ophelia demonstrate that his love for them is not only strong, but uncompromised. He, unlike other characters, does not follow motives that are selfish, but instead follows pursuits, such as fencing with Hamlet, that are for the purpose of avenging his family.

Polonius follows his children in terms of being loving. He, like Laertes and Ophelia, has strong concerns for his family. However, his love is marred slightly by his mistrust for his children. He orders Ophelia not to see Hamlet, and also sends someone to spy on his son as he questions Laertes morals. Nevertheless, I believe his love is stronger than the love that Gertrude and Claudius’ love for each other or Hamlet’s love for his late father and family because unlike the remaining characters, Polonius’ love is not heavily clouded by ulterior motives.

Gertrude follows Polonius because though she apparently loves both Claudius and Hamlet, her love for the two is split. Her loyalties and love towards Claudius and Hamlet are divided: she disguises Hamlet’s threats from Claudius as a form of protecting her son, however, she also alerts Claudius to Hamlets’ murdering, betraying her son to her husband.

Claudius is one of the least loving characters in the play, not only because he murders his brother, but because he marries Gertrude not merely for love, but for ambition and status. Claudius is self-centered and consumed by guilt and fear that someone will discover him and shows little or no concern when he discovers Ophelia’s madness and death. Instead, he worries that her death will disrupt his and Laertes’ plans to murder Hamlet. Claudius, due to his self-absorption and lack of concern for others, barely loves. Nonetheless, his love is redeemed slightly by his small amount of love for Gertrude.

Hamlet is the least loving of all the characters despite his apparent concern for his mother and dead father’s ghost because of his lack of consideration of his loved ones during his madness and actions. He frightens his mother and Ophelia and friends in his madness and he does not consider forgiveness of Claudius despite doubts he has about the validity of the ghost. 

Explication of One Art by Elizabeth Bishop

Bishop’s poem “One Art” commences with a much-repeated phrase throughout which will undergo a metamorphosis in its connotation. Initially, the phrase is hopeful and optimistic. The presentation of “losing”, though traditionally negative, is positive, as it is deemed to be an “art”, and that mastery of such art is not difficult. Bishop’s personification of “things” in the second line further contributes to the lighthearted nature of the first tercet. By describing “things” as having a desire to be lost, the act of losing does not seem dismal, but instead as the fulfillment of something’s intent.

Bishop transitions, then, to direct communication with the reader, by saying “Lose something every day. Accept the fluster of lost door keys.” Here, Bishop seems to counsel the reader to accept loss, in effect removing some negative connotation of the word “lose”.

The second stanza marks a shift in Bishop’s tone. The words “faster” and “farther” contribute a sense of urgency to the act of losing, increasing the anxiety within the mood of the poem.  Furthermore, the objects lost in this stanza are of greater importance than the keys and hours in the previous one. They have become places and names and traveling destinations. Concluding this stanza is the repetition of the assertion that loss will not bring disaster; however, where this repetition was previously counseling the reader, it seems to become excessive, causing the reader to question whether the author believes what she counsels, or whether her repetition is her trying to convince herself.

The lost objects in the third stanza contain yet more gravity: a mother’s watch, and houses. It is here that the connotation of the word “lose” may be reconsidered, for “loss” here does evidently not mean misplacing, when referring to the houses. Loss takes on a more serious connotation of either losing from possession or losing control of. Again, her repetition of “losing isn’t hard to master” insinuates that the author does not believe her own assertion. The sheer weight of losing something as important as a house, followed by the previously lighthearted phrase now repeated, transforms the phrase to become something sarcastic.

The fourth stanza carries this pattern on. The amount of loss escalates—cities, rivers, continents—contributing to the reader’s disbelief of what the author asserts, that losing is not a disaster. Also, at the end of this tercet, the author for the first time admits regret at her loss, taking away from her assertion, when she says “I miss them.”

The remaining stanza begins with the word “Even,” expressing that the final loss—losing you—is of greater significance of all previously mentioned items, including a continent. The author then adds, in parenthesis, as is diverging from her poem, what will go with the loss of what we may assume is a loved one or lover. Finally, she repeats that losing is not a difficult art to master, though this time she inserts the word “too”, emphasizing her growing disbelief in her own claim. Then, in parenthesis again, and italicized in a way that is potentially overdramatic and that stand out from the rest of the poem, the author seems to cry, “Write it!” which carries with it a note of despair and hopelessness, quite contrasting the beginning of her poem. This last stanza overwhelmingly demonstrated that Bishop does not belief loss of a loved one is surmountable, as it a more grievous offense than losing a country or treasured item. Evidently, Bishop’s repetition, combined with her final cry of “Write it!” is in fact her own self attempting to convince herself that she will overcome the disaster of losing a loved one.