Jaydan’s Comments (group member since Jan 11, 2016)

Jaydan’s comments from the Ms. A's Advanced English Book Discussions group.

I agree with Spencer. The characters in Hamlet are very similar and have a lot in common with the characters in the Lion King. I agree that by the kings dying and many other events, peace was eventually restored. I also agree with Hunter. The ghost of the deceased kings both came to the sons. They talked to them and told them that things needed to be fixed.

I do think The Loin King is a adaptation of Hamlet. Adapting is making (something) suitable for a new use or purpose; modify. The Lion King may not be exactly like Hamlet, but it is far too similar to Hamlet to say it is not an adaptation. Hamlet and Simba were the first set of Characters that closely resembled each other. Simba is the son of the king. The dead king visits Simba and told him he needs to make things right. Simba fights scar to gain Pride Rock back. Those all happened in Hamlet. The second set of characters would be Scar and Claudius. Scar planned to kill Mufasa and then actually killed him. Then Scar told Simba to run away and never come back. As soon as Mufasa was murdered, Scar immediately took the throne. He told everyone Simba was dead so he had complete power.
In the play, Claudius is praying and confesses that he Killed Hamlet Sr. and in the end Scar confessed to everyone he was the one who killed Mufasa, not Simba. The sibling rivalry between Mufasa and Scar and Claudius and Hamlet Sr. are very similar. Hamlet and Mufasa were both king. They both had a son that would take over of they passed. Then the brothers, Claudius and Scar were extremely jealous. The brothers both planned to kill the kings and take the throne right away before the sons do. The rivalry was for the power and glory and that obviously meant more than family. It bit them both in the butt in the end.
The love interests, Ophelia and Nala made the story much more interesting and relatable. They aren't necessarily the most important characters, but they do add to the story. They weren't entirely the same but they were both love interests.

In response to Jadyn:
I would agree with Jadyn, I don't think the people of Shakespeare's time would have the trouble that I did memorizing these lines. They already talked like that so it would be modern to them. I feel like I would have been more comfortable if I didn't stress so much about it. If I relaxed and felt confident, then I would have done better.

How do I think I did? I think I did fairly well. I knew what my lines were. I was well prepared when I came to class. I was a little shaky and don't like speaking in front of people. I did well on knowing my lines. I knew them so well because I practiced a lot. The biggest challenge from this assignment was preforming the lines in from of the class. It is very hard for me to get up in from of the class and present or preform anything.
I do not think it would be hard for people in Shakespeare's time to preform these plays. They all talked like that back then. I think today it would be much harder because no one talks like that today. I think that people that do Shakespeare plays today have to put a lot of effort in to them. I think they are very talented.

Cassidy wrote: "Which version of the soliloquy best represents the meaning and tone of the soliloquy and the message Hamlet was trying to get across? Why?"

When I imagined the soliloquy, I imagined the Hamlet with Mel Gibson. Before watching the three different scenes, I imagined a dark haired guy in a dark room. He would be talking to himself and staring off into the distance. He would be dramatically talking about how bad his life is and he doesn't know if he should continue to live or just kill himself. I imagined the guy to have "worry wrinkles" from thinking too much.

I think the Mel Gibson's version if Hamlet was closest to what I was imagining. The guy that played Hamlet had dark hair and the soliloquy was in a dark room. He had a very depressed yet angry and confused tone. It fit the soliloquy well because it revolved around death and whether or not dying was the answer to his problems. Mel did the best job of showing true emotion. The 1940's one had a very monotone feel. It was boring to watch. The Branagh clip was at a much different location that what I imagined and the appearance of Hamlet was a little off. The tone, appearance, and looks of Hamlet in the Mel Gibson clip was all pretty close to what I imagined. The acting was much better too.

BradR5595 wrote: "Cassidy wrote: "Did William Shakespeare really write the works he is attributed to? What is your opinion? Why does it matter?"
I don't think that Shakespeare did write the plays. I think that he wa..."

Brad makes some pretty good points about Shakespeare writing about experiences he had never experienced. I also agree he would have needed more education than he had. As Brad said, he didn't even know how to spell his name correctly.

Jadync4 wrote: "Aric wrote: "I don't think Shakespeare really wore his plays. I think that he was a real person, but I think William Shakespeare is a pseudonym for somebody else. The education that the real Willia..."

I agree with Kennedy. Shakespeare education level did not match the work. His work was very well written for someone that dropped out young. I also think someone else wrote them and gave the credit to Shakespeare.

Cassidy wrote: "Did William Shakespeare really write the works he is attributed to? What is your opinion? Why does it matter?"

I do not believe William Shakespeare wrote the plays that he has credit for. All six of the article we read had pretty good reasons why. The one that stuck with me the most was Shakespeare's son-in-law had a very good, descriptive journal and never once mentioned Shakespeare's writing. If Shakespeare actually wrote the plays and sonnets you would think that something about him writing them might be in that journal. Shakespeare also didn't have the best education. I think his play are written pretty well and even with my high school education, I don't think I would be able to write something that well. The stories just don't really add up.