His Tragic Flaw

My name is August Wilhelm Von Schlegel. I was born on September 8, 1767 and died on May 12, 1845. Born in Germany, I spent my life as a poet, critic, translator, and leader of German Romanticism. Famous for my translations of Shakespeare into German classics, I allow myself to say I am very familiar with his writing. One thing I can not help but notice, is that all his main characters have a tragic flaw. In his play titled Romeo and Juliet, young Romeo was very impulsive. This weakness of his led him easily to his grave along with his lover Juliet. Likewise, a fatal flaw is present in the troubled Hamlet. Hamlet's vulnerability that I pointed out, is his too much thinking. He is all about what goes on in his mind, resembling a philosopher. That is the reason why he is now in a tormenting situation since he thinks much before acting. It is common if you had heard the famous phrase "think before you act", but it doesn't mean to think until opportunities fade away. We all have weaknesses, but this fictional character's weak point is what shows his insecurity and leaves him facing a difficult world that is hard for him to confront.

The Dionysian Man and Hamlet

Who would have thought it would be a good idea to compare Shakespeare's character Hamlet to the Dionysian man? This was Friedrich Nietzsche's idea. It would be awkward if it had been done by a regular person like me or you, but it was a philosopher's thought. That's what they are recognized after all. Thinking, thinking, and thinking. Anyways, there is no need to specialize in his profession to find his ideas interesting and give some thought to them. Reading his analysis on the famous play Hamlet, opened my perspective towards this character. Nietzsche compares the general Dionysian man (from Dionysus) to the troubled Hamlet. He says they have both "gained knowledge", resembling both characters. However, I agree with Camille Connor's Friedrich Nietzsche, "The Birth of Tragedy", since she claims it is not true that "knowledge kills action". I share this thought with her, since I believe the knowledge gained by Hamlet as he discovers it was Claudius who killed his father, was the reason the book will have action. If it weren't for this information, Hamlet wouldn't proceed on killing his uncle and bring so much trouble into Denmark. The idea of comparing both characters, despite being peculiar, brings a lot of thought into the subject leaving the reader of both texts opened to discuss this comparison.

Hamlet Act V - A Mirror

Rage, desperation, muder. Fear, regret, tranquility. There is no way a crime could be forgiven. No matter what it is, someone will always be hurt. Whether it is the family or the friends of the victim, or the criminal himself. All of us make mistakes, although some are worst. In the case of Jack Hitt, he is one of the men that is surprised by how cruel someone's actions can be. However, the past can't be changed or erased so their is only one thing left to do.

The future. The future is the only thing that can be changed. We can manipulate what will happen next if it means of our actions. At the Missouri Eastern Correctional, a Hamlet play has taken place to give criminals a second chance. A story surrounded my murder and decision making, is the same case for many of the people who remain inprisioned due to their unjust actions. As they prepare for their presentation, they must first fully understand the plot and take the personality of the character they would each play. Although Shakespeare's play contains few characters, in prison they have decided various men would act the same character. In this way, they will all have the opportunity to look inside themselves and give a touch of their lives to the unreal play.

As the process began, Hitt noticed the actors did apply a part of themselves in their presentation. As they themselves accept in American Life, they regret their actions but lamentably they can't take them back. Nevertheless, this experience has served for them as a mirror of their actions or as for Danny, a "rehabilitation" as he heard his victim's voice through his character's voice. One way or another, the past had already be written and for Danny and the others regret was all they had left. They had all committed crimes and whether or not they deserved what they still had, they had another opportunity. The question they would have to answer is, "Are we forever prisoners of our actions?" This one is the same in Shakespeare's Hamlet, being tormented by his undecisive actions. Standing in the same position, all criminals doubt their actions. However at the end, it's not the same for everyone. They can decide to change into different persons, into good guys.

Without being professionals or had been specialized in literature, I believe this crowd has been the best to analize the play. No matter who you are or how many books have you read, it can't be compared to experience. There is no one better to act fictional characters than the ones that have already lived their personalities.

Is it the Reflection of my Subconscious?

I am a recognized play writer in England, famous for many of my plays such as the one of Hamlet. Born in Stratford upon Avon, I left behind many tragedies and comedies after my death. Unlike many of men's works, mine still remain alive, being analized by important people like Sigmund Freud and ordinary people just like you. It has caught my attention the psychoanalysist creator's thoughts of my character Hamlet, and the connection he believes exists with the play and my personal life. If I were still alive, your doubts and questions might have been answered, but since it is not this way, it will always remain a mystery in your lives. One way or another, I find interesting that someone has deeply analized my piece with my life. It is evident and true that there is a relationship between Hamlet and my son Hamnet, as the name clearly almost repeats itself. It is also a fact that this play was written by me shortly after my father's death in 1601. It may be common that many of you assume a clear connection since both cases state a relationship with my family, aswell as Hamlet the character does. Of course I am aware of the association since at the moment I wrote the tragic piece, I was also overcoming tragic moments. Anyways, I don't believe I am the first or the last to do so, since writer's subconsciously or not include a piece of themselves in their writing. Nonetheless, it is not based in my life since I am not the Hamlet in the story. However, Freud's response to my play does express an accurate understanding on the main character. Being impulsive and decisive on revenging his father's death, Hamlet struggles upon the way, seeming to be insane and doubting his actions.

What Would Be A Name Used For?

Throughout reading the novel, many questions popped in my mind. I guess the same thing happened to you. This kind of things tend to happen when readidng a book or watching a movie of suspense. This novel treats a very intense subject as it narrates a struggle for survival. As soon as I began reading, the first question I had in mind was, who is this little boy to the man? Of course I only had to read some more pages to find out who the child was. He was the man's son. However, that wasn't my only question. Everytime something happened, like when they entered one of the houses, I got worried. I asked, would this be end?

Besides the blurr of the dreams, something I could never get out of my mind, was the absence of names for the man and his child. I can't really know what is the real reason for this, but I have my own theory.

McCarthy wrote this book, based on what he imagines the world would be in about 5 to 10 decades from now. Everything gone. Desperation. A destructed world. Due to this situation he imagines happening, people lose their values and their sense. Food is scarce, therefore they have to use other alternatives. Cannabalism. Murder. Robbery. People are dehuminized, treated like animals. Not only their actions, but people take the role of animals aswell. Hunting other humans. Escaping. Migrating is search for food. No one at this point is important anymore. Not in terms of power or possesions, but no one matters at all. People were just like dogs of different breeds. Based on my interpretaion and message the author wants to give, I believe names aren't important then. What would a name be used for if people don't matter? Seeing a human at that time was the same as seeing a wild animal now a days. Who really cares what their name is? They are just a small part of nature, trying to survive daily. Or what aboy a jew 65 years ago? Who cares what their names were? They were just supposed to be animals working for the Nazi soldiers. A number would be more than enough. Just like labeling a cow. I mean, if humans are dehumanized, what would be names used for?

Always Together, Never Apart

Starvation, coldness, fear, the old man, the boat, the beach, the thief, the dead, the little boy, the people, escape. They had been through too much. But they were always together. The man always held his child next to him. He protected him from all the bad things. The man did everything he could to save himself and his little boy from the cannibals and mainly everything.

"He knew only that the child was his warrant." (5)

The boy was the only reason the father could go on. He had already lost his wife, and the only thing he had left was his son. He wasn't just only his son, he was his life, his hope, his everything. The boy also only had his father. Unlike the little boy they had found, he had his father to protect him and look out for him. The father trained his son in case he died, but at least I never expected for him to use his training. Not until the man was shot. He kept going for a while, but the situation was complicated. Both of them knew the man would die. Everything they had done now seemed like nothing. All the sacrifices were now going to be lost. But no. The father wouldn's permit his son to die with him.

"You need to keep going... You'll be lucky again... You have to carry the fire [that's] inside you. It was always there. I can see it". (278)

It was all about faith now. The father knew his son would be alright. He had learned and now he would have to do it on his own. But never alone though. He promised the kid he would never leave him. "You can talk to me and I'll talk to you", (279) the man said to his child. Just as the man had said, the child would be lucky again. He found the good guys. A man that kept his promise and woman that now cared about him.

His father was right. They would always be together, never apart.

Would It Be The End?

A shot.

A scream.

Fear.

Pain.

Coughs.

Bravery.

Blood.

Fatigue.

Surrender.

Death.

Not the end.

Hope.

Life.

Yes, the boy is still alive.