Since I could not find a regular job, I will keep trying this. First I will speak a few words about the situation of this blog. Second I will dare to make a brief review of Shakespeare's Hamlet. What is this blog? The report of my lunacy. The diary of despair (for some, I hope, the diary of comedy). I dare to say my English skills are growing rude. During this time of privation of culture, I could not have access to one of my richest sources of phantasy: cinema. My discourse is almost repetitive and annoyed. Thus I will try to study the essence of this language I just pretend I know.
Although I am not in possession of music and cinema and my old Semp Toshiba notebook is broken, I have anything at all to complain: I'm alive and writing. Life can be beautiful, I like to think in these terms.
The very material of my work is the English language. I used to take the subject in terms of form and composition: I failed several times trying to composse something with unity. The result is available right here, in this old fashioned blog named "Kalon Kakon - Ego cogito ergo sum armatus", a pretense title, for a pretense author.
Kalon Kakon has no disposition of an authentical literary work. The unity of Kalon Kakon is to have no unity: A diary were his author complains about how weak and poor soul he is, or even some texts of Clarissa Lake involving a wicked rescue of Greek myths and tradition, and stories with which seems to be a clear attempt to phylosophy, but without any method, and keep counting, there are still free chapters about society, involving the dialectics of crime, sometimes in the shape of "Dramatis Pesonae", just like a theather were the ego of Clarissa Lake either is Athena or Prometheus, a mixture of the real's life of the real author involved in dark sarcasm and non-sense, and very much bla, bla, bla.
Anyway, Kalon Kakon was faded to be only exercises. And bad ones. This blog has no start, no middle, no end. Perhaps the natural end of this blog is the dead or prison of the author. What happened after all these years trying to give form to the unlightened chaos?
Where it begins? 2011? What's the point of this issue? I'm writing something coherent and organized into a nefarious method. I'm writing a book and I won't publish anything over this matters. Nonetheles, I will remain here, showing the possibility of creation.
I'm quite aware of my situation, and I don't feel shame for that. As a writer, I am always marking my discourse with the words I intend to use. Words of my choice that I take in the air and give shape and life to them.
I must confess my unconscious isn't that huge. I have a weakest imagination and a extreme failure on the standarts of European culture. I'm guy from the hoods, better saying, I do not create this blog based on my personal experiences in life. The material for creation was purely literature. Reading I could wonder what is possible to write, what is not possible. Where is the realm of phantasy which emerge on my nerves to type several words, reviving the cultural history of our world? (Europe, America)
When I talk about ghost I am talking about Hamlet's father. Horátio thought this ghost was nothing but phantasy. But when he saw it, his friend poked him on kidding: "How now Horátio? Is not this...more than phantasy?
Hamlet is one of the psychopaths of literature I use to clap my hands. In the first Reading, I read Hamlet as a real mad person, "Mad as the sea and Wind" in the words of the Queen Gertrude. The ghost spoke to Hamlet that a serpent had murdered him and now was in a incestuous relation with the Queen. Hamlet sees yourself in the dilema of Orestes, when the Erinyes or Furies were taking his soul away. Orestes should make a a hard decision according to the laws and traditions of the ancient Greeks. The assassination of Agamenon should be payed with blood, to revenge the death of his father. The Destiny is not so easy because the assassin of Agamenon is the mother of Orestes.
Hamlet feels the hunger and thirsty for blood and assume the character of the crazy guy, disturbed by the Furies and try to reach Athena's purgation, to find out the cause of the murder. Hamlet could had heard the ghost and go immediatly to murder Claudius and Gertrude to avenge the honor of his father.
Instead of acting for the heart, Hamlet was smarter, pretending he was crazy he could see more clearly the intentions of the court. That is too much proved that with devotious deviance and pitious actions we do sugar' em the devil, If I remember well what Polonious said to Ophelia, when he recomends his daughter to read some literature in order to forget the madness of Hamlet.
Hamlet is representing the character of a mad person. He isn't really mad, he's very sad and anger for the treason, but he acts coldly, premeditating his actions. Otherwise Hamlet would not hire a group of actors and teach them how to act, how to cause this or that impression on the character, what Hamlet, as the director of the piece, desires and wishes of the actors and for the acting.
During the apresentation of the theather Hamlet could observe the eyes and the actions of Claudius, because the matter of this piece was just a case of a murdered king by treason of his own brother. Claudius loses his patiente and leaves the audience. The effect expected for Hamlet was fullfiled: The theather showed the hidden remorse of the King, causing the purgation of Claudius, which was also expected for Hamlet.
Hamlet is a character of horror. When he step into his mother's room saying very much as a vile assassin, thirsty for blood: "Mother, mother, mother...". Hamlet it's very scary in his means to find out if the ghost is saying the truth or if he is really insane to the bones. This representation is also a dark hour of terror: "A dead rat for a ducat" when he slained Polonious. When Claudius severaly question Hamlet where is the body of Polonius, he replies: "At super..." kidding with the murder situation, as he used to joke in many other times. The coldness of a psycho is what gives Hamlet this shape of classic horror. The terror of Hamlet came about the fact he's not mad in fact for the assassination of his father, He created a character to represent the madness of losing a father under the same circunstances and oblige your Family and the court to act with him.
This is the kind of thing I'm talking to. I do not create stories over my experience. I create stories over the history of literature, which is very much different. But I'm quite sure my reader is wondering about the "To be, or not to be", "To be dead, to be sleep", the long monologue in which Hamlet discuss existence for a profound prisma of phylosophy. To be alive or to be dead is a simple inference. Is he representing or is he really insane?
What character is this? And poor Ophelia, did she understood the question of "To be or not to be"? Hamlet was talking to Ophelia when he spoke this big monologue over life, existence, theather, love and whatsoever. Next, the romantic character is perfect. Hamlet questioned Ophelia using words like daggers: "Are you honest?", "Are you fair?" and Ophelia "My lord?", why are you trying to offend my honour with these sharped words? Wonders Ophelia. The actor inside Hamlet is decisive, tragical and comic at the same time: "I loved you not" is the piecing affirmation of him. Hamlet is a very extradordinary masterpiece of literature. I would not spoil it. Read it.
Clarissa Lake - Thunders and rays in Hamlet: the modern psycho character.
No comments:
Post a Comment