English Senior Exit Portfolio

Secondary Education

Georgia State University

Jonathan L Ferenczy
2120 S Lumpkin St
Athens, GA 30606
Graduation: 2010 Fall Semester

Introductory Statement
This portfolio is the accumulation of my work in the English field during my time here at Georgia State University. While my work was and is
influenced by outside forces not at all related to Georgia State University,
the current evolution of my writing has been shaped mostly by my experiences here and the teachers who lent their amazing talents, their time, and
their energy to furthering others like myself.
The declared concentration I have chosen is Secondary Education.
However, and this is hard to show within the confines of the portfolio, I
have taken many courses in the Creative Writing concentration. This
has had a great impact on my writing style, as I find that the most controversial arguments and essays are most convincing and compelling if they
are told in the fashion of a good story, connecting to the reader in such a
way that he or she desires for it to end in a conclusive fashion.
I said before that this is the accumulation of my work in the English
field. Despite being an English major and intending to teach English
courses in my professional life, there is more to me than simply what is
being shown in this portfolio. Instructions in a field are not islands,
standing alone and isolated from each other, nor are they alien to other
fields of instruction. It is for this reason that I have taken additional courses, mainly in the field of philosophy, and have applied knowledge that Ive
gained in those courses to my writing style. This is most clearly seen in
my included essay, CAT and the Sublime Red Skull Pin, where the lines
between philosophy and English blur and overlap.

Table of Contents

Section I
List of College English Courses
1
List of English Courses
1

Section II
Pieces of Evidence
2
Piece of Evidence #1 : Multiple Drafts
3
Shakespeare Verses Branagh
Shakespeare Verses Branagh
Piece of Evidence #2 : Traditional Research Paper
23
CAT and the Sublime Red Skull Pin
Piece of Evidence #3 : Two Essays
29
Modern Roman Empire:
The Fall of Microsoft
Iago, The Moor of Venice
Written by Iago
Piece of Evidence #4 : Showcase of my Abilities
43
The Loss of Ingenuity
Piece of Evidence # 5 : Ten Influences
47
Ten Influences
Piece of Evidence #6 : Alternate Path to Literary Analysis
53
Alternate Path to Literary Analysis

Section III
Reflective Es-

say
56
Reflective Essay
57

Section I
List of College English Courses

LIST OF ENGLISH COURSES

English 1101 - English Composition I
English 1102 - English Composition II
English 2120 - British Literature
English 2130 - American Literature
English 2140 - Introduction to Literary
Studies
English 2150 - Introduction to Rhetoric
and Advanced Composition
English 2160 - Studies in Popular Culture
English 3120 - Electronic Editing and Publishing
English 3140 - Editing
English 3150b - Introduction to Creative
Writing: Fiction
English 3160 - Narrative Techniques
English 3180b - Contemporary Fiction
Craft
English 3220 - History of the English Language
English 3280 - English Drama (Shakespeare)
English 3280 - English Drama
English 3290 - English Fiction
English 3400 - Sixteenth Century English
Literature
English 3870 - American Fiction
English 4140 - Shakespeare, Later Works

English 4200 - Topics: Cyborgs in American Culture

English 4300 - Senior Seminar: Literary
Studies
English 4330 - Senior Seminar: Secondary
English Education

Section II
Pieces of Evidence

Piece of Evidence #1 : Multiple Drafts

These essays were written for James Hirshs English Drama course offered in the fall semester of 2009. Titled Shakespeare Versus Branagh, the
goal of the assignment was to point out dierences between the play as it
was written and might have been performed, and those found in the
movie of the play. The first paper is the original, written as I viewed the
movie and going on seventeen pages. The second paper is the final version
that was handed in to my professor and was graded. The assignment had
asked for it to between four and six pages, and so the seventeen-page essay
was not submitted for a grade. I went so far as to not only point out these
dierences but also to explain how these changes were significant. In the
end, the most important thing that I learned from writing this paper was
what information to cut out when shrinking a large amount of material
down to meet the requirements set by the teacher.

Shakespeare Verses Branagh

Kenneth Branagh has taken William Shakespeares Hamlet and reinvented it once more.
With many changes from both Shakespeares tradition and traditional takes on Shakespeares work, Branagh has, like other directors, actors, and screenwriters before him, put
his own interpretation upon this classic tragedy. But is his work more an interpretation, or
is it more an adaptation. It is my belief, and I will do my best to point key dierences between Shakespeares work and Branaghs work to demonstrate this, that Branaghs work
leans more towards the adaptation side of the scale.
What is the dierence between interpretation and adaptation? An artistic interpretation occurs when a person makes a performance of someone elses work. This is not limited to a single medium, such as music or stage performance, but to all mediums. For the
purpose of this paper, however, I will be looking at, in particular, the dierence changing
mediums from a stage performance to a film. An interpretation is not a change; that would
be an adaptation. An adaptation is any change, whether implicit or explicit, that occurs
within a performance. Interpretations and adaptations are not mutually exclusive, nor are
they absolutes. A particular performance can (and often will) contain both interpretations
as well as adaptations. It is best to think of interpretations and adaptations as a sliding bar
with the two on either ends.
Interpretations will always occur when it is someone elses work. Having Hamlet look
o into the distance when he speaks is an interpretation, as is an actors performance
wherein they depict Hamlet as mysterious. Adaptations occur when there is a transference
of dialogue from one character to another or the elimination of characters in their entirety.
However, there is a third type that needs to be named. A certain type of adaptation, interpolation is when things are added into the performance. For example, Shakespeare wrote in
many sexual innuendoes into his plays that have not withstood the test of time; to make this
clear to the current generation, performers might add in gestures to signal this (such as a
pelvic thrust). These changes have the desired explicit eect of making the sexual innuendoes known tot he audience; however, these have the potentially undesired implicit eect of
making the character vulgar. In Branaghs film, interpolations come most often in the form
of flashback scenes. As these occur, I will discuss the significance of these.

So is Branaghs film more of an interpretation or more of an adaptation? Start with the

plays Act I, Scene I: Francisco (at this point unnamed) stands his post when Bernardo
(also unnamed) enters opposite to him wearing identical uniforms. In the film, Francisco is
shown on watch, intense, and hears howling noises when suddenly he is tackled from behind. Francisco, rather than cry out for help or alarm, declares in fear to know the identity
of the person who struck him.

Bernardo, just as in the play, refuses to reveal his name and

instead demands to know who the other is. This is a dire break with military protocol,
which resembles the break down in order of succession to the throne I will talk about later.
It is clear that Francisco is on guard duty, and while his actions in the play demonstrate that
he is breaking military protocol, in the film his actions can be deemed almost treacherous:
here he is, a representative of the countrys military force, getting attacked, and he is doing
nothing to let the others know that an attack has been made against the country. There are
also other changes that need to be pointed out at this moment. The first is the sound of the
bells tolling. This sound is absent in Shakespeares Hamlet and is conspicuous because of it.
Tis now struck twelve, Bernardo says, yet there was no stage direction to let us know this.
Francisco says to him, You come most carefully upon your hour, but if the bell didnt toll
during the play and it has indeed just struck twelve, doesnt seem angry that Bernardo is
actually late. Branagh decided to include the sound of the bell in his work. Additionally, in
the film, Francisco sees the statue begin to unsheathe a sword, which frightens him right
before Bernardo tackles him.
Continuing on further, Marcellus tells Bernardo that he has brought Horatio to see the
ghost that the two of them have seen twice before. Horatio is skeptical of what it is Marcellus and Bernardo see. Horatio says tis but our fantasy, / And will not let belief take hold of
him, Marcellus says to Bernardo. However, in the film, the actor who portrays Marcellus
interprets the next lines strangely. He hesitates and rolls his eyes when he says the word
apparition as though he himself doesnt believe what he has seen not once but twice.
Some other changes during this scene includes the camera moving away from the speakers
to gaze first up at the stars and then at the armor-clad apparition. But here is another major
change that redefines the characters of Marcellus, Bernardo, and Horatio: in Branaghs film,
the three flee within the castle gates, hiding behind stone columns and fences.

This

wouldnt have happened quite the same in Shakespeares theatre setting because they lack
the ability to change sets that quickly, but also there is no indication that these three military soldiers ever abandon their post when they see a potential threat. Another major

change from Shakespeare to Branagh occurs shortly after this, when Horatio is explaining
about King Hamlets defeat of Norways Fortinbras and how the young Fortinbras is taking
this. Branagh gives us a flashback to show young Fortinbras, something that did not happen with Shakespeares theatre. This is somewhat important as, in plays, characters are
unidentifiable until we are shown a face and a name. This was true with Bernardo and
Francisco, and this would be true the first time young Hamlet meets young Fortinbras.
However, this confusion does not occur in the movie as we are immediately given a face to
the name.

And once again, when Claudius tells of Fortinbrass uncle, the viewers of

Branaghs film are treated to a flashback depicting exactly what Claudius is telling everyone.
I spoke earlier about how the opening scenes break in order where military protocol
was concerned mirrored the break in order where succession to the throne occurred before
the play started. It is clear that the character Hamlet should have succeeded to the throne
when his father was killed, but by a ploy conducted by his uncle, Claudius ascended to the
throne. It would appear that at this moment is when Denmarks order began to break
down. Bernardo and Francisco break procedure; Horatio, Marcellus, and Bernardo break
ranks and flee from a potential threat; even the orderly barrier between life and death is
broken down when the former King Hamlet returns as a ghost.
And now for Hamlets big entrance onto the stage. In Shakespeares play, Hamlet walks
out onto the set. In the film, however, the camera pans back stage, behind the curtain of
Claudiuss audience chamber where everyone is to focus on a young man dressed all in
black (while everyone else is wearing white and red predominantly). I am too much i the
sun, says Hamlet. But while Hamlet in the play appears to at least attempt politeness in
public, the actor in the film portrays Hamlet as sneering and sarcastic to the point of dishonor. And while he is telling his mother how he feels, while again the actor portrays him
as sarcastic with just a hint of bitterness, slow music plays in the background that inspires
two feelings simultaneously: grief and righteousness. The music, something that Shakespeare most likely didnt have or used and certainly that doesnt survive in the text, makes it
very well known to the viewers of the film that this guy in black is our hero, that in the entire country of celebration they are wrong while he is right in mourning. In the directors
adaptation to make this scene more dramatic (something that many would argue does not
need to be done to Shakespeares work), he has made the potential unforeseen change that
those who may not have been on Hamlets side are now forced onto his side, that the equivalent of a neon sign has been posted over Hamlets head that says, This is our guy, be sym-

pathetic towards him. Here is another big change. After Claudius tells Hamlet to stay in
Denmark and then goes to leave the chamber, flower petals are throne, and the camera focuses on Hamlet glaring after Claudius through the storm of pink petals. Then, some unnamed woman goes up to Hamlet, begins to take his arm (presumably to lead him out of
the chamber) but is brought away forcefully by Laertes who smiles a wry smile that seems
to convey several meanings, including the one of Sorry, she knows shes not supposed to
bother you. This speaks volumes of both Laertes and Ophelia, for she was the unnamed
woman. For starters, this scene int he film shows Laertes as smug and arrogant, a personality quirk that is not immediately received in the text. Secondly, this shows that Ophelia has
some feeling for Hamlet, and even when Hamlet looks at her and then looks downcast,
even the fact that he allows her to take his hand, all of this shows that the feelings are, to a
degree, mutual. Lastly, this occurs before the scene where Ophelia is told by both her father
and brother to stay away from Hamlet, which means that they were already manipulating
her and, at least was the implication from this scene, already telling her to stay away from
Hamlet. Lastly in this scene, Hamlet bids farewell to Marcellus, Bernardo, and Horatio after
they tell him about the apparition. Hamlet says a few lines after they leave, but Branagh has
the lines spoken as a thought through Hamlets head, with the words being spoken but lips
unmoving.
Here was another change I saw in the following scene, where Laertes warns Ophelia
about Hamlet. Shakespeare uses this scene to demonstrate that Ophelia is subservient to
both her brother and her father and yet also demonstrates that she does have a backbone
and a quick wit. This holds true for Branaghs Hamlet, done so more than once with the
glances and looks Ophelia throws her brother. However, what Branagh does that may or
may not have occurred in Shakespeares Hamlet is the way in which the actor that plays
Laertes acts towards her. When they walk around outside, he puts an arm around her waist
and keeps it there. His face portrays slight anger when Ophelia looks down (and Laertess
eyes and the camera follow) to see Hamlet standing with others out of earshot, and then
prior to him leaving he kisses her and stares into her eyes. Even the way he says But here
my father comes, and the looks she gives as she reprimands him seem to imply a much
closer relationship than that of brother and sister. While there was no implication of sexual
tension between the two of them in Shakespeares play, it might be Branaghs attempt to
show one more mirror between situations, a feature already discussed that Shakespeare
wrote in, in this case the situation between Claudius and Gertrude. The audience had al-

ready seen a situation of incest, although then it was more socially acceptable on many different levels between the new king and the old queen. This has a more profound change on
the character, but examine the other change Branagh did between Ophelia and Hamlet. I
mentioned earlier how the scene in the audience chamber hinted at mutual feelings between the two. Throughout the play, Hamlet is never clear on his feelings for Ophelia and
the subject of whether or not they were in a relationship is debatable. Branagh decides to
clear that up for his audience by showing at this moment flashbacks between Ophelia and
Hamlet, and makes it very clear that there was something there. Another main change is
the implication of the last line of Act I, Scene III, when Ophelia is charged by her father to
no longer see Hamlet and she responds with, I shall obey, my lord. In the play, this is
spoken to her father; in the film, Polonius is on his way out, the scene flashes between
where she is currently and the flashback of Ophelia and Hamlets lovemaking, and the
words are said (with a depressed inflection in her tone) in her mind rather than out loud.
Shakespeares version implies that Ophelia is confirming to her father that she is subservient; in Branaghs version, the implication is that she also belongs mentally to her father,
whether she likes it or not. Another consequence of this is the breaking of order previously
established.
One of the biggest scenes in Hamlet is when Hamlet is told of his fathers death by his
fathers uncle. In Shakespeares take, Hamlet is simply told the tale by a specter, the ghost of
his father. This in itself is a supernatural occurrence. However, Branagh takes this one step
further. As I will discuss later, we are given over to the omnipotent power of flashbacks as
the ghost speaks. In addition, Branagh demonstrates just how supernatural this is by having fire shoot from the earth and have the ground split before Hamlets very steps. But
there is something very interesting in the flashback that Branagh shows his viewers. As
King Hamlet is dying from the poison, the camera shows Claudiuss face. What is interesting is that Claudius is depicted not as confident or as accomplished but rather frightful, his
face almost seeming to scream to the audience, What have I done to my brother?. It is
made evident later on in the play that Claudius is remorseful during the famous prayer
scene, but this adaptation implies that Claudius was remorseful from the very first moment.
Moving on to Act II, Scene I, here Polonius is ordering Reynaldo to spy on Laertes. In
Shakespeares Hamlet, there is only two people here: Polonius and Reynaldo. In Branaghs
Hamlet, there are three: Polonius, Reynaldo, and unnamed attractive woman. What purpose does this serve? For starters, she sits in the bed with a docile look in her eyes, imply-

ing that perhaps she had just shared Poloniuss bed (Polonius himself looks half dressed). I
mention the docile look because it calls to memory the way in which Ophelia is supposed
to act, implying that Polonius prefers of his women the same he is instructing into his
daughter. The second purpose she serves is to be commanded into Reynaldos lap by Polonius. This scene serves multiple functions: the first is that it confirms she is not strictly
Poloniuss woman because he would not want her to dishonor him by being flirtatious with
another man, but that she also is in his service by the way he is able to command her and
she does these commands; secondly, she further emphasizes the sexual comment that Polonius makes about wanting to find out if his son frequents houses for sale. The third purpose she serves is to demonstrate that Polonius has many agents for many purposes and
that they are not mutually exclusive. This is demonstrated by the fact that she stays in the
room as Polonius begins his conversation with Reynaldo as well as the fact that she leaves
through a concealed door in the wall. Now consider the part where Ophelia comes and
tells Polonius of the way Hamlet was acting. This interpretation of Branaghs shows Ophelias backbone: when he asks her if she gave Hamlet any hard words of late, she screams at
him that she did as was commanded, storming away in tears. The attitude and expressions
as portrayed by Ophelia in the film basically yell at Polonius, This is all your fault.
In Act II, Scene II of Branaghs film, the audience watches as Ophelia begins to (but is
unable to finish) reading a letter Hamlet has sent her aloud to her father, the king, and the
queen. As Polonius finishes reading the letter where Ophelia left of, the scene flashes back
to Hamlet and Ophelia in the bedroom, with Hamlet speaking aloud the words in the letter.
But wait, not only did the flashback now occur to Shakespeares audience, Ophelia wasnt
even present during the reading of the letter. This adaptation tries to make more real two
things that Shakespeare left unclear: the first is how tormented Ophelia is by Hamlets attitude and, by extension, how her fathers command has impacted her; the second is to
demonstrate once again that there was something more to Hamlet and Ophelias relationship that was not as easily evidenced. But this has the unintended consequence of showing
the audience just how more heartless Hamlet is. It is made clear through Hamlets actions
that he cares for no one who stands in his path to revenge, and that he considers Ophelia an
agent of Claudius. However, while the letter did indeed come from Ophelia, and while
Ophelia may indeed be heartbroken, the audience does not get to see this in Shakespeares
version. The second unintended consequence is that Hamlet may very well be using to his
advantage the illusion that he his mad with lovesickness to his advantage at this moment in

time; by showing that he was/is in love with Ophelia in flashback form means this was/is no
illusion but something real. In the same scene, Polonius comes to speak to Hamlet, who
startles Polonius by wearing a skull mask. This serves a couple of purposes to Branaghs
Hamlet: the first is that the skull represents death, which Hamlet is mourning, and macabre
attitude, which Hamlet is displaying; second is that the deathly mask is hiding Hamlets real
face, the same way in which Hamlets true intentions and emotions are being hidden by his
antic disposition; a third and unintended consequence is the foreshadowing that this entails, which is that Hamlet, who resembles Death or the Grim Reaper with the mask on and
his black clothes, will kill Polonius; a fourth consequence is that it makes Hamlet seem trivial and obvious, that he is not trying to hide his intentions but is rather trying to get a quick
rise out of Polonius.
Consider now one of the most famous speeches throughout literary history. In Act III,
Scene I, Hamlet delivers his famous To be, or not to be, speech. This speech has been analyze over and over again, each time revealing a new nuance or new take. It has been pointed out by critics that the To be speech is in fact a feigned soliloquy and a feigned aside.
Hamlet arrives expecting to see Polonius and Claudius (as they summoned him) and finds
no one there but Ophelia. Hamlet already regards Poloniuss dutiful daughter to be a threat,
and so he puts on the antic disposition that he does when in the presence of an enemy.
However, here is a big change from Shakespeares take that Branagh makes: Ophelia is absent throughout the entire speech. The whole point of the speech is to deceive his enemies
by deceiving Ophelia and the concealed Polonius (for Hamlet knows that Polonius cannot
be far from her if he was summoned by her father). Without Ophelia being present (and
therefore no indication that this is a threat) Hamlet has no need to put on the antic disposition, which means that he is not acting, which implies that he is in fact melancholy. This
greatly changes the dynamic of the scene. In addition, Branagh adds in a sound that makes
Ophelia look over her shoulder, a sound that alerts Hamlet to the high probability that others are listening in. Whereas in Shakespeares Hamlet, Hamlets hurtful words to Ophelia
are a combination of jealousy and anger at her, they serve the purpose of being a staged
production to the eavesdroppers he is aware of. For Branagh, Hamlet really is more hurt
and angered at Ophelia for her actions and her words, not what she represents (an agent of
Claudius) nor at the fact that her presence not only betrays him but that he, expecting an
attack and finds only Ophelia, suspects more of her purpose in being where he was summoned.

10

In Act III, Scene II, the audience is treated to the play within the play.

There is a

marked change in Branaghs version, however, and this change comes about as a result of
the medium but makes an impact nonetheless. As the actors play out King Hamlets death,
and as Hamlet and Horatio watch Claudius for a reaction, the camera swivels around the
audience in its entirety. Viewers see not just Claudius looking uneasy but also Gertrude,
Polonius, Ophelia, and many unnamed audience members who whisper and mutter to
themselves, who shift in their seats and look away. Clearly, they all think that this is hitting
a little to close to home.

Taken into account Hamlets actions that during said scene,

Claudiuss reactions are no longer so out of place. Everyone is looking uneasy, so Claudius
would look out of place if he himself did not look as uneasy as everyone else. Remember
that Claudius is a politician with enough oratory skill that he managed to convince Denmark to make him king rather than Hamlet and to allow the marriage to the former queen
so soon after the death of the king; reading an audience and playing along should be an easy
feat for him. In addition, Branagh relocates the very last part of the scene where Hamlet is
alone and talks to himself to the next scene after Polonius and Claudius speak with each
other.
In fact, this relocated scene occurs as Claudius is preparing for his most famous speech
often titled the Prayer Scene. This is the most crucial scene for Branagh. The caption for
Hamlet that Branagh provides is, The story of a man who cant make up his mind. Naturally, this is the moment where Hamlet hesitates, where he has both the opportunity and
ability to claim his revenge and yet doesnt because Claudius is praying and is ready to be
sent to heaven while his father was taken in not such a manner. Hamlet claims he wants the
murders to be equal, he wants to catch Claudius when he is not concerned with his own
mortality but rather is embracing emotions and life.

In the end, Hamlet does not kill

Claudius at this moment. But Branagh takes this one step further. Claudius is confessing
his sins and his inability to repent while in the repentance box; Hamlet, unknown to
Claudius, is preparing to kill him from the other side. This changes the dynamic slightly.
While the confession is meant to be private and to God, Hamlet here is acting as priest and
listener to Claudiuss confession (itself a powerful act). And Hamlet would be oering
Claudius a form of absolution by killing him, revenging his father and setting the score
straight. However, it is important to note that revenge is not a Christian notion, that instead Hamlet would be meant to forgive, and so Hamlet who grants us the appearance of a
servant of God for this scene would instead be more like the servant of Satan.

11

Another change is in Act III, Scene IV after Hamlet has killed Polonius (believing it to
be Claudius) and Hamlet sees the ghost. In the play, the ghost enters and Hamlet immediately addresses it. In the film, the curtains blow and its clear that Hamlet senses something,
but even the audience is not able to see the ghost yet, which mirrors Gertrudes inability to
see it. Indeed, when the ghost and Hamlet speak to each other, the ghost is present in the
film; when Gertrude goes to speak to Hamlet and walks around, the ghost is nowhere to be
found (at least not until Hamlet tells her what to look for). Here too is another change.
King Hamlets ghost does not appear in the same armor he appeared in previously, but
rather in rags. The significance of this is that no more is the ghost the symbol of the king
and country, dressed for war in a quest for revenge. Now he comes humbly, to step between
Hamlet and Gertrude, to remind Hamlet of the revenge but also to not take revenge on his
mother.
A small change. In Act V, Scene I, Gertrude recounts how Hamlet, Behind the arras
hearing something stir, / Whips out his rapier, cries, A rat! a rat!. In the film version,
Hamlet did not pull out a rapier but instead a dagger, a stiletto I believe. This is interesting
because throughout the film, the audience has seen members within Elsinore practice with
the rapier, and Hamlet even walked around during a training session possibly as an instructor. The rapier appears to be a central weapon to Denmark, but a stiletto is an assassins
blade. In other words, by changing the weapon, Hamlet is no longer killing Claudius as a
member of Denmark and for the good of Denmark (not that he may have ever been intending to kill him as such) but rather as a personal vendetta and in the same fashion that
Claudius killed his father: with an assassins tool, rather than an honorable one. Another
change Branagh made: after hearing about Hamlets murder of Polonius, Claudius goes
from the room he was in with Gertrude back to the bedroom where Polonius was killed and
begins examining it. It is clear in the film version that Claudius now suspects Hamlets true
intentions (he starts looking around corners, checks behind the curtain), and to further
cement his suspicions he picks up the two pictures Hamlet had been showing his mother in
the previous scene. Another change is that Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, who are not
meant to be present during Claudiuss discussion with Gertrude over what Hamlet did, can
be clearly seen standing in the open doorway, listening to everything that was said. There is
little indication that either Rosencrantz or Guildenstern knew the full details and the king
and queens thoughts in the original Shakespeare, but it is plain that Branagh wanted to
make their presence known to the audience.

12

In Act IV, Scene II, Branagh shows Hamlet dodges from guards, Ophelia, Rosencrantz,
and Guildenstern as he dodges around the answer they seek: what has Hamlet done with
Poloniuss body. This serves two purposes: the first is a visual representation of Hamlets
verbal dance around the truth; the second is that it shows Hamlet now considers everyone
at Elsinore an agent of Claudius. If his antic disposition was only put on for those he
deemed a threat or loyal to Claudius, then by racing through rooms, running over tables,
and making such a disturbance he has made it clear to the audience that everyone at Elsinore is a threat or loyal to Claudius. This was also somewhat demonstrated back in Act III,
Scene II of both the film and the play when Hamlet makes a fool of himself in front of the
court during the play, openly being crude to Ophelia and mocking of both his mother and
uncle.
In Act IV, Scene III of the film, Claudius loses his temper with Hamlet while trying to
find Poloniuss body and slaps him. This too serves multiple purposes as it was not present
in Shakespeares surviving play: the first is that it shows Claudius cannot keep up the act of
the cool and calm politician all the time (something that should be known to everyone but
is obviously demonstrated here), and the second is that Claudius is showing his authority
over Hamlet not as king over subject but as guardian (maybe even parent) over child. A
slap across the face is a typical response to a rude and petulant child; clamping in irons is a
typical response to a rude countryman and subject. Another change Branagh makes is the
kiss Hamlet gives Claudius after the father is mother bit. It is clear that he does this just
to irritate Claudius and to reemphasize his point, but once again this makes Hamlet to be
the incurable prankster that we saw back in Act II, Scene II with the skull mask. There is
another interpolation Branagh makes in between Scenes III and IV where Ophelia is
screaming and clutching at the fence as Poloniuss body is carried out of the palace. What
this serves to do is make the audience aware of Ophelias state of madness that will come
unto her, that grief manifested itself in her in a similar fashion that grief seems to have
manifested itself in Hamlet (to all who see his antic disposition).
One more powerful scene is Act IV, Scene IV when Hamlet rearms his vow for revenge and in light of Fortinbrass actions. There are two technological dierence present
here. The first is that the camera is constantly zooming away from Hamlet to show both
foreground and background so that by the time he reaches the conclusion of his speech
(My thoughts be bloody, or be nothing worth!) he is miniscule, a black dot on a white
landscape. The second is the music that plays, with the crescendo rising just as he finishes

13

his speech. Taken together, the music gets louder and the countryside grows as Hamlet
rearms his vow for revenge as though he were but an ant in Gods grand design of destiny.
The other interesting point is that it is at this moment Branagh calls for intermission, as
though the first half of the film was Hamlet trying to find his identity and make his decision, and the second half will be of Hamlets renewed vow. Branagh cuts to intermission
not halfway through the play (which wouldve been around Act III, Scene II approximately)
nor does he even finish the act he is in. Instead, he cuts the continuity of the act in two,
providing a break between Hamlets confirmation and actions at Elsinore as Laertes vows to
avenge his father being murdered at Hamlets hand (sound familiar?) and as Ophelia descends into depression and madness and antic disposition (sound familiar?). In fact, where
Branagh makes his intermission break, the first half kind of mirrors the second half.
We have another great change immediately upon return from intermission: Branagh
decides to summarize what happened before and what has happened ostage that actually
has yet to happen. He tells us about Ophelias grief: Poor Ophelia, divided from herself
and her fair judgment without the which we are pictures of mere beasts. It is not that he
says anything we cannot infer on our own but rather he decides to put it all out there. In
addition, Branagh shows us that indeed, Ophelia appears to have gone mad at the residents
of Elsinore are not taking any chances a second time. He has her bound up in straightjackets, shows her bouncing o walls, and has her locked up where the audience can see her.
Here is the interpolation I mentioned before: as Ophelia reminisces about her relationship
with Hamlet and makes sexual comments she does certain actions such as hit Claudius with
a pelvic thrust or lay on her back and thrust up at the air.
It would appear that Branagh is trying to show new sides of Ophelia by adding in many
shots of Ophelia throughout the second half of his film. In the beginning of Act IV, Scene
VI, Horatio sees Ophelia being given a cleaning via a guard with a hose. After he is done,
Horatio leaves and Ophelia is left alone, but the camera focuses on her as she pulls from her
mouth a key (presumably the key to her cell). This is how he explains that Ophelia escapes
long enough to drown herself. Once again, Branagh interpolates a scene in between scenes
where the audience is able to see Ophelia submerged in water.
In Act V, Scene I, Hamlet has returned to Denmark and has a battle of wits with the
gravedigger. What may or may not be a sincere acknowledgement of Yorick Branagh decides to make absolute by interpolating flashbacks of a young Hamlet with Yorick. In addi-

14

tion, Hamlet holds onto Yoricks skull for much longer in the film than he does in the play.
This implies he is more attached to Yorick that the play would suggest.
In Act V, Scene II, Hamlet and Laertes are preparing for their duel, and Hamlet is begging for Laertes pardon. As he does so, Branagh has the camera zoom out of the hallway
and instead shows Elsinore with its singular guard. It then moves out to show Fortinbras.
The significance of this is that while Denmark in red (Hamlet, who was forced to reside in
Denmark, wears a red cloak) duels with France in blue (Laertes, who returns to Denmark
from France, wears a blue cloak) to settle Laertes revenge, Norway in brown and steel blue
(Fortinbras army wears these colors) marches against Denmarks green (the singular guard
at Elsinore) to settle Fortinbrass revenge. There are a number of comparison that can be
made here.

Hamlet, who shares his fathers name, is seeking revenge; Fortinbras, who

shares his fathers name, is seeking revenge. In the end, the two of them are successful in
their revenge. Hamlet is alone against the army of loyal Claudius supporters including, but
not limited to, the poised blade of Laertes and the poisoned wine of Claudius; Fortinbras on
the other end has an entire army to march at a single man. Another interpretation of
Branaghs is the duel itself. The first blow goes to Hamlet in style, the second one is a humiliation of Laertes as Hamlet smacks him on the ass with the flat of his blade. This implies
that Hamlet is a much more skilled fighter to be able to not only best Laertes but also to
humiliate him. Again, Branagh interprets asides meant to be thoughts flowing through the
characters head rather than spoken words. Another change, and this one is more serious, is
when Laertes gets the poison on his rapier. In Shakespeares play, Laertes already possessed
most likely the poisoned rapier, but Branagh has the unnamed Lord poison the rapier after
Gertrude drinks from the poisoned goblet. The problem with this is the implication of
Claudiuss character. Claudius wants Hamlet done away with, and so he ensures that Hamlet will die by poison either through the rapier or the cup. The implication is that he does
this before they start, ensuring that the poison is there before they start and he has all his
bases covered. However in Branaghs work, the poison on the rapier is done at the last moment, after the first plan for the wine had failed. Rather than being an assurance of Hamlets demise, Branagh turned it into Claudiuss plan B. Here too is another change Branagh
made that changes the character: Laertes wounds Hamlet when his back is turned and before they had started. This implies that Laertes is backstabbing Hamlet, going against the
code of honor that he seems to have held up for so long. This is supported by the comments he makes to Ophelia much earlier on where he is concerned not for her safety but for

15

the family name. This is an odd comparison because he sees Hamlet as the mad one and
yet in the film, Hamlet does the honorable thing that after disarming Laertes he returns to
him a weapon so that it will be an even fight. Osrics lines are also displaced. Osric initially
says, Nothing, neither way, before Laertes strikes; Branagh moved this until after they are
brawling now, destroying the palace, and right before Claudius speaks. Branagh also interpolates a scene wherein in between Laertes revealing the kings treason and Hamlets attacking of the king, Osric leaves and is subsequently stabbed (but not killed). Branagh also interprets Hamlets murder of the king to be overly done: not only does he stab Claudius by
throwing the poisoned rapier, he drops a chandelier on him and then forces him to drink
the dregs of the poisoned goblets wine. And once again Branagh interpolates the mirror
that as Hamlet gets his revenge so too does Fortinbras, for as Laertes and Claudius die Fortinbras s army has conquered Elsinore. Branagh shows Fortinbras being crowned after one
of his last speeches, making it seem more ocial and less open to discussion than Shakespeare would let us believe based upon Horatios words. And his last interpolation is showing Hamlets funeral, complete with the destruction of his fathers statue, which is something Shakespeare did not write in nor intended to show.
So what is the dierence between Branaghs version of Hamlet and other works? For
starters, he makes wide use of flashbacks and other film techniques to show what is occurring in other places, sometimes at the same time. Shakespeare did not do this for three reasons: the first was that he lacked the technological means to do so (although being a master
of the art, perhaps he couldve found a way to show his audience this); the second was that
what the characters might not be able to see could very well be something other than what
they think it is that was going on (because Hamlet hears noises in Act I, Scene IV he presumes that it is his uncle and mother celebrating, but it very well might be something else);
the third and final reason is that the audience is given views of someone elses thoughts that
are not normally available. One of the reasons that Shakespeare never used voice-overs was
that nobody is privy to the thoughts of another person (and often, they are not privy to
their own thoughts and subconscious actions). The ability to see beyond what a character
can see makes the audience superhuman, even godlike.
So we are left with the original question: is Branaghs film more of an interpretation or
an adaptation? Certainly, all the lines of dialogue are in there, and each character speaks
their own lines. There is no transference, and there is no misplaced scenes. The biggest
adaptation comes in the shape of his flashbacks, which provide much backstory that Shake-

16

speare did not include. This is great shift because it gives us insight that the viewers and
ordinary mortals shouldnt and werent intended to have, and it also changes the fundamentals of the characters. Ophelia is no longer quite so dutiful if she had already slept with
Hamlet and thus was no longer a virgin, nor is the character of Yorick possibly an invention
of Hamlets to amuse and debate with but rather a real character with real memories. There
were many additions that showed an Ophelia grief-stricken and descending into madness,
both after her rejection of Hamlet and the death of her father. But one of the biggest adaptation I consider are the numerous instances where Branagh tries to model himself after
Shakespeare, creating mirrored references and allusions where they may not have existed at
all. Shakespeare, obviously, used the theme of doubling well, but Branagh makes many
more occurrences of this. Rather than allowing the viewers to make this connection themselves, Branagh forces it upon them, thus losing the intrigue they once held. I would say
that all these instances tend to make the movie more an adaptation than an interpretation.

17

Shakespeare Verses Branagh

Kenneth Branagh has taken William Shakespeares Hamlet and reinvented it.

With

many changes from both Shakespeares tradition and traditional takes on Shakespeares
work, Branagh has, like other directors, actors, and screenwriters before him, put his own
interpretation upon this classic tragedy. But is his work more an interpretation, or is it
more an adaptation? It is my belief, and I will do my best to point out those key dierences
between Shakespeares work and Branaghs work I find crucial as a means to demonstrate
this, that Branaghs work leans more towards the adaptation side of the scale.
Kenneth Branagh makes heavy uses of two tools in his work, and it is this that lends the
play more to an adaptation than to an interpretation. The first of these tools is the flashback
sequence. This has vast consequences on the play and on the characters within the play.
For starters, flashbacks take the viewers through a sort of temporal and/or spacial travel. In
the first scene of Branaghs film, the audience along with Bernardo and Marcellus listen to
Horatio tell them about young Fortinbras. The films viewers, however, are given this godly
power to actually see what Fortinbras is doing as we listen. There is no indication that Horatio was present at Fortinbrass war meeting but rather that he had heard about what is going on from other sources. The second consequence is that it grants the viewers of the film
the godly power to see into anothers mind. In the first scene of the fifth act, Hamlet treats
the audience to a flashback sequence of his relationship with Yorick. This is clearly a memory of Branaghs Hamlets, but not one that Shakespeare may have intended. In addition,
there are many indications throughout Shakespeares play where the audience is meant to
understand that they cannot know the hearts and thoughts of another, yet Branagh makes it
so for his audience. These flashbacks are a special type of adaptation called an interpolation: something has been added to the play that wasnt there before.
The second tool Branagh uses (and this often overlaps with the first) is that he builds on
Shakespeares original theme of mirroring and doubling. Shakespeare used this theme quite
often, and not just with Hamlet either. For example, in the very first scene of the play,
Francesco and Bernardo enter from opposite sides, both at a military march, both wearing
identical military uniforms. Throughout the play, examples of mirroring can be seen, and
just as this opening scene shows us, the mirroring is not always true nor is it always going

to stay as such. Branagh breaks this first mirror but adds in many others. By interpolating
both scenes and flashbacks, Branagh creates stronger mirrored relationships that Shakespeare may have intended. For example, Branagh often interpolated scenes in the second
half of his film that depict Ophelias descent into madness and the reasons behind this.
Branagh does this to make Ophelia a more sympathetic character but also to show us how
just like (and how unlike) she is to Hamlet. Through the use of interpolated flashbacks, the
audience is also shown more of Fortinbras and as how he is like Hamlet. Shakespeare already intended for the audience to look at the two: for one, they both share their fathers
name, for another they are both princes, and both seek revenge for their fathers murder.
However, Fortinbras is shown in Branaghs version to also have a ruling uncle who forces
him to not do as he wishes, and he is also shown to be rebelling against his uncles wishes.
The two are not unlike in the ways in which they take their revenge. Both deceive their uncles, but Fortinbras never wavers in his decision for revenge whereas Hamlet hesitates.
There was a bigger mirrored scene I felt that Branagh was trying to imply that probably
didnt exist within Shakespeares Hamlet and certainly was no mention of it within the surviving works. That mirrored scene is the one between Laertes and Ophelia. Branaghs
Ophelia is every bit the subservient woman Shakespeare wrote her while still maintaining
her attitude that she demonstrates to her brother. However, Branagh does more with their
relationship.

When the two are walking outside the palace and Laertes warns Ophelia

about Hamlet, he keeps his arm around her waist as they walk, he holds her close when
they talk, even when Ophelia glances at Hamlet far below them anger seems to come to his
face that speaks a little louder than it should. The two lock eyes in such a way as to suggest
sexual tension as they prepare to part, the way Laertes says, But here my father comes,
and even as she throws him the dirty look as he warns her suggest a bit more was going on.
All these may not mean much, but as I already demonstrated Branagh likes to expand on
the mirroring theme. Now, consider that the audience has already seen an incestuous relationship unfold. While the dynamics and social acceptability are dierent because it is a
case of the new king marrying the old queen, it is not so unthinkable that Branagh would
lead the audience to believe the two situations are similar.
Lets go back to Ophelia for a minute. I discussed earlier how the flashbacks redefine
Ophelia in the eyes of the audience, the flashbacks making her seem much more the sympathetic character and her decent into madness more understandable. But there is a more
crucial implication that Branagh tries to make. He shows flashbacks to Ophelia and Ham-

19

lets relationship as something more than Shakespeare intended. By doing this, Branagh
wants to show why Ophelia is so torn up by her fathers command to stop seeing Hamlet.
However, while this makes the audience more sympathetic to her plight, it also makes
Ophelia less dutiful of a daughter. By oering Hamlet her virginity, she has not only dishonored her family name and herself but she has not kept the duty that all daughters at this
time owed their fathers.
There is one scene in particular in Branaghs film version that stands out in its significance. Shortly after Hamlet has begun to put on his antic disposition, Polonius comes to
speak with him, and Hamlet startles him by wearing a skull mask and coming around the
column. On the immediate level, this turns Hamlet, who is supposed to be depressed and
sullen, into a bit of a prankster. There seems to be no purpose for this unless to demonstrate his madness. From a symbolic perspective, this has enormous ramifications. For
starters, Hamlets antic disposition fits the personality of the skull mask perfectly. The mask
is representative of death and mourning, which plagues Hamlets mind. For another, the
mask is hiding Hamlets true face, just as the antic disposition is hiding Hamlets true disposition. Lastly, Hamlet, clad in black and bearing the face of a skull, brings to mind the image of the Grim Reaper. This foreshadows not only Hamlets own death but also the death
he will visit upon Polonius soon after this scene. Lastly, Hamlet shares his fathers name,
and his father is dead yet walking the earth still. Hamlet, wearing the mask, is a walking
the earth in a pretend death. It is not just symbolic of this generations Hamlet but it is a
tribute to the previous generations King Hamlet as well.
A bigger change with deeper ramifications than this occurs with the famous To be
speech. It has been discussed before how Shakespeare implied this scene to be a feigned
soliloquy and a feigned aside. Hamlet was summoned to this spot by his enemy/uncle and,
expecting an attack, finds no one there but Ophelia, whom he has already deduced is an
agent of his enemy and therefore not to be trusted. In Shakespeares play, he notices Ophelia standing there and so puts on the antic disposition he adopts whenever in the presence
of an enemy. In Branaghs film, Ophelia enters after his speech, so Hamlet there is no one to
put on this disposition act for. In this case, this is not an act of Hamlets but rather implies a
truer nature to his speech.

This was not what Shakespeare had intended and greatly

changes the dynamic of the character.

20

Another powerful scene is when Hamlet rearms his vow for revenge in light of Fortinbrass actions. There are two technological dierence present here. The first is that the
camera is constantly zooming away from Hamlet to show both foreground and background
so that by the time he reaches the conclusion of his speech (My thoughts be bloody, or be
nothing worth!) he is miniscule, a black dot on a white landscape. The second is the music
that plays, with the crescendo rising just as he finishes his speech. Taken together, the music gets louder and the countryside grows as Hamlet rearms his vow for revenge as
though he were but an ant in Gods grand design of destiny.
The other interesting point of this scene is that this is the moment Branagh calls for intermission, as though the first half of the film was Hamlet trying to find his identity and
make his decision, and the second half will be of Hamlets renewed vow. Branagh cuts to
intermission not halfway through the play (which wouldve been around Act III, Scene II
approximately) nor does he even finish the act he is in. Instead, he cuts the continuity of
the act in two, providing a break between Hamlets confirmation and actions at Elsinore as
Laertes vows to avenge his father being murdered at Hamlets hand and as Ophelia descends into depression and madness and antic disposition. In fact, where Branagh makes
his intermission break, the first half kind of mirrors the second half. This again goes along
with my theory that Branagh is attempting to add in mirrored eects throughout the play
that Shakespeare might or might not have intended.
So we are left with the original question: is Branaghs film more of an interpretation or
an adaptation? Certainly, all the lines of dialogue are in there, and each character speaks
their own lines. There is no transference, and there is no misplaced scenes. The biggest
adaptation comes in the shape of his flashbacks, which provide much backstory that Shakespeare did not include. This is great shift because it gives us insight that the viewers and
ordinary mortals shouldnt and werent intended to have, and it also changes the fundamentals of the characters. Ophelia is no longer quite so dutiful if she had already slept with
Hamlet and thus was no longer a virgin. There were many additions that showed an Ophelia grief-stricken and descending into madness, both after her rejection of Hamlet and the
death of her father. But one of the biggest adaptation I consider are the numerous instances
where Branagh tries to model himself after Shakespeare, creating mirrored references and
allusions where they may not have existed at all. Shakespeare, obviously, used the theme of
doubling well, but Branagh makes many more occurrences of this. Rather than allowing
the viewers to make this connection themselves, Branagh forces it upon them, thus losing

21

the intrigue they once held. I would say that all these instances tend to make the movie
more an adaptation than an interpretation.

22

Piece of Evidence #2 : Traditional Research Paper

This essay was the final paper for my fall 2009 course Studies in Popular Culture taught by Laura Barberan. One of my preferred combinations, this course -- more so than many others -- allowed me to combine
my love of writing with that of philosophy, with a dash of my hobbies outside of school thrown in, providing me with a rare instance where random
knowledge of video games proved insightful. In this paper, I analyzed
themes discussed in the class, primarily those of Slavoj Zizek and Paul
Gilroy, and applied those to the underlying plot of the video game The
World Ends With You, produced by Square Enix in 2007. The essay focuses primarily on the theme of unanimism and the dierences between the
philosophies of Zizek and Gilroy.

CAT and the Sublime Red Skull Pin

Sie wissen das nicht, aber sie tun es. They do not know it, but they are doing it. These is
the definition of ideology that Slavoj Zizek provides, as written by Karl Marx himself. The
writing was in discussion about capitalism, but this may not always be the case. Paul Gilroy
points out through a quote by Richard Wright that this same brand of thinking is what
brought about, among other things, Nazi mentality. But is it possible for such thinking to
have not just harmful results? Is it possible for this belief to be imposed and followed for
good results? That is exactly what The World Ends With You tries to answer in its own way.
A creation of companies Square Enix and Jupiter, The World Ends With You is a game
where the player takes control of Neku Sakuraba, an anti-social character previously living
in the Shibuya shopping district of Tokyo, Japan. As he plays in the Reapers Game to win
his life back, he discovers new friends and the reason why he died. Coached throughout
the game by the mysterious cafe owner Mr. Sanae Hanekoma, Neku learns to trust in his
new friends. At the end of the game, he is provided a choice that will change the fate of
Shibuya.
So what does The World Ends With You have to do with ideology? The antagonist in the
game, Megumi Kitaniji, turns out not to be such a bad guy at all.

After learning that

Shibuya was to be destroyed, Kitaniji attempted to save Shibuya by remaking it. He was
given thirty days to do so. Kitanijis plan to remake Shibuya involved the Red Skull Pins,
items that Neku was instructed to popularize. The true power of the Red Skull Pins was to
remove the individuality from the people and instill them with this single thought: To
right the countless wrongs of our day, we shine this light of true redemption that this place
may become as paradise. What a wonderful world such would be Unfortunately for Kitaniji, this plan failed and the fate of Shibuya was instead passed down to Neku. But was
Kitaniji wrong for doing what he did? To protect the people living there, he attempted to
take away from them their individuality.
According to Gilroy, this is inevitable. a susceptibility to the appeal of authoritarian
irrationalism has become part of what it means to be a modern person, he writes in his essay, The Tyrannies of Unanimism. To understand Gilroys position, it must be understood
what he means by the term unanimism. The word comes from the French literary move-

24

ment early in the 1900s, it practices a central consciousness with central, collective emotions and crowd behavior. As stated before, Nazi Germany would be such an example, a
society thinking with a single thought and a single understanding. Gilroy does not think
much of this idea, although he does think it inevitable to some degree.
Another key feature about Marxs statement is the character of Mr. Sanae Hanekoma.
Known by his designer name of CAT, Mr. Hanekoma is, among other things, a grati artist.
His artwork is inspirational to Neku as is CATs motto: "Enjoy every moment with all you
got. The world ends with you. If you want to enjoy life, expand your world. You gotta push
your horizons out as far as they'll go. Mr. Hanekomas goal, as an artist, is to inspire everyone to live in the moment and to do anything and everything that you want to do. But is
this really any dierent than the goal of the Red Skull Pins? In at least one way, it is.
Whereas the Red Skull Pins force the thoughts onto the wearer, much like the Nazis did
with their fear tactics, Mr. Hanekoma is only trying to inspire this belief, not impose it. The
irony with this statement, however, is that it supports Marxs and Zizeks claim: although the
people may not know it, they are doing it.
This also supports a positive answer from Zizeks question: Does this concept of ideology as a nave consciousness still apply to todays world? But The World Ends With You is
not the only one supporting a yes answer. In much of the worlds metropolises, the people are trapped by the capitalism around them. While The World Ends With You is only a
game, it demonstrates this fact very clearly by placing the games setting inside of Shibuya.
Not only is Neku out there to save the city, he is also out there to take control of fashions. A
side part to the game is that whatever brand of clothing and pins Neku happens to be wearing and constantly using is what the people in Shibuya will start subconsciously wearing. In
an odd twist, Neku not only supports this theory but actively shapes it. In fact, as Charles
Herold puts it, Neku can implant thoughts in peoples minds, to take part in this entrapment. Each neighborhood has its own fashion trends, Herold continues, and in a salute
to consumer culture you can maximize your attacks by wearing whatever labels are fashionable in a particular neighborhood.
As stated earlier, Mr. Hanekomas goal as a designer and artist is to inspire people. "Enjoy every moment with all you got. The world ends with you. If you want to enjoy life, expand your world. You gotta push your horizons out as far as they'll go. There is a certain
amount of irony with this statement. The world ends with you, means roughly that you,

25

the individual, are all that matters. If you want to enjoy life, expand your world, can be
taken to mean that in order for the individual to live life to the fullest and still be true to
themselves, they have to take the world and make it their own. But here is where the irony
takes form. First o, if the individual in question does indeed expand his world, making it
all his own, then there is a distinct possibility that everyone in such a world would act like
the individual. Not only is the concept of individuality lost, but Gilroys point would be
proven and the world would become a unanimist society. Secondly, and more directly ironic to this concept of individuality, is that those that follow this belief become not their own
person but the person that Mr. Hanekoma wants them to be. In other words, to be inspired
by CAT to be a strong individual is itself to become one with the unanimist thought. Neku
is such a victim of this. Inspired by CAT, he constantly strives to be his own person no matter the situation; yet this is not Neku doing as Neku wishes but doing what CAT wished.
Lastly, in an odd twist of irony, one of the goals of the games director, Tatsuya Kando, was
to plant a somewhat similar idea into the heads of the players. We wanted North Americans to realize that a city exactly like the one in the game actually exists on the other side of
the Pacific Ocean we believed that by showing those players what types of fashion or
music are popular in Shibuya, as well as giving some insight into the minds of the Japanese
youth, they would begin to show further interest in Japan and its culture Once players
have completed the game, it would be wonderful if they could come to Japan, [Nintendo]
DS in hand, and explore the real Shibuya.
There is a bit of problem when discussing Gilroys theory. For one thing, Tyrannies of
Unanimism is focused primarily with the African diaspora and the possibilities of a return
to Africa. For another, the unanimism that he focuses on is a militaristic society. Gilroys
work consistently focuses on African-American culture, the concept of exile, and race in
general. The World Ends With You is not a focus or a case study on race itself, nor is it a militaristic force that is the enemy, at least not theoretically. While all powerful and in control,
those who run the Reapers Game and those who wish to see Shibuya destroyed are not acting upon the city or its people directly. It is not their goal to control people, nor is it their
objective to impart their will upon the people. They are merely observers who have lost interested in Shibuya as it is.
So who is right in the end, Gilroy or Zizek? The answer is a little bit of both. Gilroy believes that it is inevitable that society will be brought into a unanimist thought, that the allure will always be there (at least authoritatively). Zizek says that unless society take an ac-

26

tive role in confronting this ideological fantasy, it will be doomed to doing it without knowing it.

27

WORKS CITED
Gilroy, Paul. "Revolutionary Conservatism and the Tyrannies of Unanimism." New Formations 28 (1996): 65-84.
Herold, Charles. A World Beyond Comprehension (but You Know You Love to Hate It).
New York: The New York Times, 08 May 2008.
Kando, Tatsuya and sta. Afterthoughts: The World Ends With You. Electronic Gaming
Monthly, Issue 230: July 2008.
The World Ends With You. Tokyo: Square Enix; Kyoto: Jupiter, 22 April 2008.
Zizek, Slavoj. The Sublime Object of Ideology. London: Vergo, 1989.

28

Piece of Evidence #3 : Two Essays

The first essay was assigned in my second level introductory English
course, which I took in the spring of 2006. This essay was my final essay
for that course, which was taught by Matthew Brinsmaid,. In addition,
this was also the second English course I had taken since starting college
at Georgia State University. The goal of the course was to learn how to
construct an argument. Comparing Microsoft to the Holy Roman Empire,
I claimed that Microsoft is on the decline and that we were standing at the
edge of a great change in the computer technology field.
This second essay was not so much a final essay as it was the second
essay of two due at the end of the term, right before the final exam (which
was two essays covering many topics studied throughout the course). I am
particularly proud of this essay and, in particular, the title. While the
main argument in this essay is to list the possible reasons and motives for
Iagos actions, the argument is made both in the essay and in the title that
Iago is the puppet-master behind everyone in the play, almost as though
he is the playwright and the star of the play. This play was written for my
Shakespeare topics course, taught by James Hirsh in the spring of 2009.
These two essays together show my growth during this thrre-year period. In between these two courses I had taken several philosophy courses
and multiple creative writing courses. I believe that the time spent between the first and second essay allowed me to better flesh out my arguments and analyze my theses before writing an entire paper and handing it
in for a quick grade. In other words, I learned to be patient and to think
my arguments through before calling it a finished argument.

Modern Roman Empire:

The Fall of Microsoft
For years the consumer market has been flooded with cheap computers that have
changed the modern public in the same way Henry Ford changed the public with cars. And
like Ford before him, Bill Gates, CEO of Microsoft Corp., has made the modern world dependent on computers for their day-to-day lives. Due to recent changes in both Microsoft
and Apple, the leading competitor of the computer world, I believe that we are looking at
the downfall of Microsoft. Like the Roman empire before it, its decline will be long and
drawn out, but changes in the world around Microsoft have left Apple shining in this new
realm of change. Among these changes include advertising, stability in each companys operating system, the computers appearance in both outside casing as well as internal structure and appearance of their operating system, and public perception of the companies and
the systems.
The way music is listened has changed over many years. From cassette tapes to compact
discs (CDs), and now we have Moving Pictures Experts Group (MPEG-1) audio layer 3,
more commonly known as MP3s, as the new standard. And the preferable way to play
MP3s are through MP3 players. Two of the biggest MP3 players are, coincidentally, attributed to these two companies: Microsoft and Apple. The iriver series of portable audio
devices are created by the company iriver limited (formerly iRiver and more commonly referred to as iriver), follows Microsofts premise of allowing anyone to use their software,
which allows for companies such as iriver to create products using Microsofts Media Player
program. On the other hand, Apple and their player the iPod continue to show that Apple
does not trust anyone to reverse engineer their technology. Apple has required all users of
the iPod, whether running Windows or Mac (the two operating systems) to download their
free program iTunes, whereas the iriver requires you to have the free version of Windows
Media Player. Apples iPod is also the only portable audio device, and iTunes is the one of
the few audio player programs, that natively supports MPEG-4 coding, more commonly
referred to as advanced audio coding (AAC), which has been dubbed as MP3s successor in
terms of quality. The general consensus would be that the iriver would be more popular,
seeing as how more people have Microsoft personal computers (PCs). However, statistics

have shown that the iPod and iTunes have dominated that market field with approximately
a 70% majority. This is due in large part, I believe, to Apples recent advertising style.
iPod ads have now become famous for their single-pastel-coloured backgrounds and
their black silhouette people listening to their white iPods. Introduced during the Super
Bowl, this advertisement has now become the standard for all iPod commercials as well as
nearly all iPod posters. No other MP3 competitor has had any such success with visual advertisement. Another advertisement Apple has employed is their Student Union promotion. Started last year, in the fall time before schools start, Apple gives approximately a
$200 rebate to all those who purchase both a new Apple computer and a new iPod, thereby
granting for free a now-discontinued iPod Mini. In addition to this level of advertising,
Apples commercial after the announce of switching to Intel processors from their traditional IBM processors was followed by this catch-line: Whats an Intel doing inside my Mac?
More than its ever done in a PC. Intel-based Macs are still fairly new, Intel previously only
making processors for Windows-based computers. But the first Macs to switch to the Intel
chip were their two most popular models of computers.
The iMac, some have credited, is the sexiest desktop computer around. The entire computer is built into a flat-panel monitor (either a 17 or 20 model) and includes several universal serial bus (USB) ports, a digital video disc (DVD) burner to create your own DVDs, a
wireless networking card, a web camcorder (web-cam) called an iSight, and Bluetooth,
slowly becoming a new standard for short-range wireless devices such as a keyboard or
mouse. Many have found this an excellent model, no longer having to make the additional
purchase of a nice monitor, and its size makes it easy to fit nearly anywhere. Their second
most popular computer is the PowerBook. The PowerBook is their more-powerful of their
two laptop computers, and it was recently discontinued in favor of the Intel-based MacBook
Pro. The PowerBook came in three dierent sizes (12, 15, and 17) and was the standard
companion for anyone in the entertainment industry, such as Steven Spielberg and George
Lucas. The iBook is their second of three laptop computers, the cheaper alternative to the
PowerBook. Less powerful, it runs on their educational line of computers, as does the
previously mention iMac and the discontinued eMac. It is more aordable and is still powerful enough to use basic features of the more processor-intensive programs, such as Adobe
Photoshop or Apple Final Cut Pro.

31

PRODUCTS

WEBLOGS

TOPIC

ware
Laptops
iPod

stmag.com

MAC HELP

April 11, 2006

MAGAZINE

FEEDS

NEWSLETTERS

SHOP

DISCUSS

SEARCH

Macworld
Print

Related Topics: Mac Laptops

After all
of that,
there
is no real comparison
in terms of names between the iMac and
From
the
Lab:
XP-on-Mac
benchmarks
XP-running
Macs give PCs
run one
for could
their money
any
Windows equivalent.
The amost
compare this to would have to be a compariBy James Galbraith

Accessories
Headphones
Home Players

son
between an Alienware laptop to the MacBook Pro. But when full customized to equal
Youll forgive me if I seem a little confused these days. Despite the fact that I work in a lab full of

as Displays
Scanners
Servers
Input Devices

Its not that Im

over a platform
switchrather,five hundred dollars. The only reason why
PowerBook
wasmulling
less expensive
by approximately

Video
Illustration/3D
et Photography
Publishing
Utilities
g

oom

ansition

ftware

Macs,
I spend
morePowerBook
of my time lately
at Windows
Mac OS X.
the
power
of the
two staring
years ago
when I XP
wasthan
firstat looking
at purchasing one, the
this XP overload is part of Macworld Labs efforts to see

I how
am Microsofts
not providing
thissystem
data in
its entirety
has to do with a recent program launched by
operating
performs
on Apple
hardware now that software exists that enables you to

Apple
itself
early weeks
of With
April.the Entitled
boot into
XPin
onthe
an Intel-based
Mac.
help fromBoot Camp, it is the first program of its
our sister
PConly
World,
weveversion;
been running
kind,
and publication,
its release is
a beta
this means that the program has not been finalthe WorldBench 5 real-word benchmark suite on all of

our Intel
to have
gauge some
cross-platform
ized
and systems
may still
bugs to performance.
work out. It allows the Intel-based Macintosh com-

puters
(iMac,
MacBook
Pro, and
Minicame
as of
Our testing
efforts
began shortly
afterMac
hackers
upright now) to partition its hard drive a secwith a way to get Intel-based Macs to run Windows XP.

ond
and
installtakes
Windows
XP Service
Pack 2 on it. There are programs known as emuThetime
hacked
method
a lot of effort
install and
configureand
just
as computer
much efforttotorun
run two
benchmark
lators
that allow
the
OSs at once, but the emulated OS runs incredibly
tests, as it turns out. WorldBench automatically restarts

the computer
many,amounted
many timestoduring
the Boot
testingCamp changes all of that; it allows the running
slow
and as never
much.
process, forcing us to manually select which OSXP or

and
installation
ofafter
a dierent
OS natively, no emulation whatsoever. The pros and cons of
OS Xto
boot into
each restart.
this
willwhy
be we
discussed
later,
but arrival
this is of
significant
thisa topic
because
Thats
greeted last
weeks
Boot Camptowith
mixture
of reliefthis
and allows
sadness.us to finalby Apple
to let Intel-based
run Windows
XP, Boot
allows OS
you and
to setrunning
WindowsnalyDeveloped
test an Apple
computer
against aMacs
Windows
computer
usingCamp
the same
as the default startup system; that meant we no longer had to babysit the machines during testing. At

the same
time, we
were also
littlebe
peeved
about
how many hours and
daystest
we between
had wasted
tively;
in other
words,
this awill
the first
close-to-accurate
speed
the two OSs
benchmarking the hacked method.

to get an estimate as to which one is better.

Even with Boot Camp, it still takes a couple of hours to set these systems up. But once running,
theyve been very stable. Here are some WorldBench 5 results, compared to three computers recently
As by
said
tested
PC before,
World. Boot Camp is only a beta, so even these tests are not accurate 100%.
WINDOWS XP TESTING
Test System

Processor

2.0GHz Core
Duo T2500
2.16GHz Core
Apple MacBook Pro
Duo T2600
Dell Inspiron E1705
2.0GHz Core
(portable)
Duo T2500
HP Compaq nx9420
2.16GHz Core
(portable)
Duo T2600
HP Pavilion a1250n
2.0GHz Athlon
Media Center Desktop PC 64 X2 3800+
Apple iMac

WorldBench Mulititasking
5 Score
Test

Windows
Media
Encoder 9

Roxio
Adobe
VideoWave Photoshop
7.0.1

Microsoft
Office 2002
SP-2

96

423

294

267

320

541

98

419

280

259

305

535

97

498

305

271

325

549

101

444

279

259

311

575

94

521

321

290

367

563

>Better

<Better

<Better

<Better

<Better

<Better

Best results in bold. All individual test results in seconds.

All systems had 1GB RAM. Macs used Apples Boot Camp beta to install Windows. All machines were tested with Windows XP Pro
with Service Pack 2 except the HP Pavilion which had Windows Media Center Edition installed. For more information on WorldBench
5, go here.Macworld Lab testing by James Galbraith and Jerry Jung

Page 1 of 3
This is a chart from Macworld, a well-known publication that is, obviously, Mac-targeted.

acworld.com/2006/04/firstlooks/xpbenchmarks/index.php

Their sister is PCworld, obviously Windows-targeted. This means that they are most likely
the least-biased of all critics out there. This chart shows bench-tests between five dierent
computers. Basically, this shows the speed of various tasks of the dierent computers, each
running Windows XP natively. In this series of tests, the MacBook Pro scored the best in

32

four slots, while the HP Compaq scored the remaining slots and tied for one with the MacBook Pro. Just as a side note, the two desktop computers are the only ones in their category
running dierent processors. Each of the computers had at least a 2.0 GHz Core Duo Intel
processor; the HP Pavilion was running a 2.0 GHz Athlon, and it turned out to be even less
powerful than the laptop computers. The direct comparisons should be made as follows:
Apple iMac to HP Pavilion (both desktop computers), and MacBook Pro to the HP Compaq (both laptops). The Dell Inspiron can be in either category, running a 2.0 GHz whereas
the two laptops are running 2.16 GHz and the two desktops are running a 2.0 GHz, but it
can also be grouped with the laptops as it too is one. In each test, comparing the two previously mention desktops, the iMac beat the HP Pavilion. Judging by these, the two Macintosh computers are running Windows better than the Windows computers have been running Windows for years; let the ironic laughter ring forth.
The pros to having Boot Camp are simple. The first, and obvious, is that it lowers the
barriers to making the switch over to a Mac from a PC. Everyone has that one little program that does not have an Apple equivalent; now, they can have that program and still use
an Apple computer. Not only will it encourage people to switch computers in terms of running Windows XP, but you will get the Apple OS that can almost be seen as a bonus to play
with, eventually finding out that Mac OS X is just as simple if not simpler to use and much
more secure and less viral. In addition to the everyday user, the ability to run Windows XP
will appeal greatly to the average gamer. No longer will we have to wait for a Macintosh
translation that comes out many months, if ever, after the initial release of the game; a Windows version will now work and run smoothly. Also, your hard-earned PC software (Microsoft Oce, your games, etc.) will now be useful when making the switch.
The cons are that, firstly, that Microsoft will make a lot of money o of this. This is because it is required by Boot Camp to have the latest and legit version of Windows XP, something that will cost anywhere from an additional $150 to $250. This leads me to the second
point, which is that making the switch has already been deemed expensive because of the
cost of Macintosh computers. Compared to computers of equal caliber, this is not necessarily true, but it does appear that way at first. And now the cost has just gone up by requiring
to purchase another OS. Another con is that, because this is a natively running OS, you are
required to restart your computer to switch OSs, meaning that this will not be useful if you
only need to run one program. And finally, there is the fear that Apple will drop its OS and
support Windows. This has been denied by both Apple and its users; Apple has stated that

33

they will not include support, pre-install, or sell copies of Windows XP. However, they do
recognize that everyone has something they need to get out of XP and are playing that field
of the market.
The public has had mixed feelings about Boot Camp and it making a dent in the Windows-dominated market. To quote several users on the website for Macworld magazine
(www.macworld.com), user macnuke has said, Well, they weren't exactly spanked.. but my
thoughts are they are beaten at their own game in the overall. And that's not even counting
that you have OS X in there just to make life easier. User gefitz says, in response to the
same article, Raw numbers are all well and good. I'm still not convinced this is much of a
dent in the market. The people who are Windows users that will want to shell out the significantly higher cost (Mac hardware + FULL VERSION of Windows XP + software to enable dual-boot) to simply try out the other guy, I'd think, is small ... Heck, cost is a lot of the
reassures stay Windows users ... well, that, and their business is a Windows shop ... So
while there are some who are proud and pleased that Apple managed to surpass Microsoft
running their own software, there are still others that do not think this will be an important
factor for making the switch. My personal opinion on this is that the Macintosh operating
system is far more secure, and that the hardware is superior. While it may not convince the
majority of the public to switch, many businesses now might be more compelled to make
the switch. Because Mac OS X does not use the C++ programing that Windows does, it is
more dicult for hackers to get into the computer. And the lack of viruses on the system as
well as the lack of hardware crashes and system lockouts would have already been appealing
to many companies. Now the option to run Windows XP with the option to run the more
secure Mac OS X could very well make it the most desirable computer for companies. Also,
the Mac Mini is less that $700 and is capable of running both as it is already an Intel-based
Mac.
Looking at the predominately PC magazine Laptop (www.laptopmag.com), they compared eight dual-core Intel-based PC laptops. Of the laptops they looked at, the HP Pavilion dv5000t (approximately $1,617) gets the longest battery life, a maximum of approximately seven hours and thirty-one minutes; however, the graphics seems to have been less
powerful than the model its replacing, and the battery is very bulky.

The ProStar

PR9068-4A ($3,474) appears to be the closest equivalent to the MacBook Pro. A sharp
web-cam, one gigabyte of random-access-memory (RAM), this laptop is running a dualcore AMD Athlon processor rather than the dual-core Intel chips. The ProStar strikes out

34

more for the gaming-generated user, boasting one of the most powerful graphics cards, but
a low battery life (one hour and nineteen minutes). Comparing power-to-power, the MacBook Pro would probably be slightly more powerful and the Macintosh system more appealing security-wise, as well as cheaper by at least $500; however, the biggest problem for
gamers wanting to switch to Mac is the lack of games, and so the only reason that one
would be getting this high-end of a computer is to play games. Overall, of the computers
they recommended in various categories, the cheapest dual-core PC laptop was the HP
dv1000t, the downgraded model of the dv5000t, at $1,729 for the best thin and light category; the most expensive being the Dell XPS M170 in the gaming category at a price of
$3,072. The MacBook Pro starts at at $1,999.
Apple is taking the world, slowly but surely. Their profits rose 41% by the end of the
fiscal second quarter, which ended 1 April 2006. This profit rise was credited mostly to the
iPod sales; 8.5 million of the MP3 players were shipped out to retailers, and iPod sales grew
64%. Computer sales for Apple only grew about 4%, but this number is expected to rise
with the release of more Intel-based Macs.

35

WORK CITED
Portable Pundit: Time to Switch? Laptop Magazine May 2006.
Business Not As Usual. Laptop Magazine May 2006.
Galbraith, James. From the Lab: XP-On-Mac Benchmarks. Macworld: The Mac Product
Experts. April 2006.
Galbraith, James. From the Lab: XP-On-Mac Benchmarks; Macworld Forums. Macworld: The Mac Product Experts. 11 April 2006. 17 April 2006. <7http://www.macworld.com/forums/ubbthreads/showflat.php?
Cat=&Boa...read&Number=404526&page=0&view=collapsed&sb=&o=&fpart=all&vc=
1>
Olson, Parmy. iPods Do It Again For Jobs Apple. Forbes Magazine. April 2006.
Apple Introduces Boot Camp. Apple.Com. 5 April 2006. 17 April 2006. <http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2006/apr/05bootcamp.html>
iriver America. 2006. 17 April 2006. <www.iriveramerica.com>

36

Iago, The Moor of Venice

Written by Iago
Iago has many relationships with many characters in the play Othello. It can actually be
argued that he is the central character of the play rather than the character for whom the
play is named after. The main focus of this will be to argue this point by examining the
character of Iago, through his actions, his motivations, and his relationships between Iago
and Othello, Iago and Desdemona, and Iago and Cassio.
The reason that the play Othello is called Othello and not Iago has much to do with Iagos
character. Iago is a character who works behind the scenes, the puppeteer rather than the
puppet. He isnt so much the title character as he is the author. Iago is the Shakespeare of
the play. He possess many of the same skills the dramatist uses, the only dierence is that
he uses these skills to manipulate, what is to him, real people and real lives, as opposed to
the playwrights who manipulate their creations and their characters. By the end of the play,
Iago has not only stolen Othellos peace of mind and Shakespeares talent, but he has also
even stolen the play away from Othello.
Iago has many reasons for acting the way that he does. Some of his reasons are understandable, some (but not manny) of them are just, and some of them are unreasonable.
Iagos only justifiable reason for acting in this way is that he was passed over for a promotion by Othello. This reason alone is not one that would justify him destroying the lives of
Othello, Cassio, and Desdemona, but it is one with value to it. This is equivalent to a boss
promoting a friend who is less competent, and there is reason to be angered by this.
Iagos understandable reasons are few as well. One, he believes that Othello might have
had an aair with Emilia, Iagos wife. There is little to no evidence supporting this claim,
but the claim alone is one more straw on his broken back. Secondly, Iago loves devising
plots and manipulating others. He does this because he is insecure about himself. This insecurity can not be so much understood but sympathized to an extent. For instance, in Act
III, Scene III, Iago has begun his manipulations of Othello directly. Prior to this scene, Iago
had been laying groundwork and manipulating those around Othello, perhaps to test Othello, perhaps to see just how involved he would need to get involved to ruin Othellos life,

perhaps to simply prolong and enjoy this ultimate challenge for him. In any event, he has
since manipulate those around Othello, but now he has begun to manipulate Othello directly. In this scene, he describes to Othello a time when Cassio, while slumbering, admitted to
having an aair with Desdemona. The scene is important because Iago describes it vividly,
about how Cassio thought Iago was Desdemona and so had been caressing and kissing him
in ways that most other men wouldve forced awake Cassio, but Iago instead lies there and
does nothing. In sleep I heard him say, Sweet Desdemona, / Let us be wary, let us hide out
loves! / And then, sire, would he gripe and wring my hand, / Cry, O, sweet creature! and
then kiss me hard, (Act III, Scene III, Lines 420 - 423). This exemplifies at least one of the
insecurities he bears: he has discovered that he himself has homosexual desires, but has already accepted the social convention denigrating homosexuality.
The third and last understandable reason for Iagos behavior is that Iago has a talent. He
has a cynical personality, a talent for spotting weakness and flaws within other people, and
a real ability to make intricate plots. Iago has a love for intrigue, and this is his expression
of this love: manipulation out of those that he has perceived have done him wrong. Had
Othello not passed him over for a deserved promotion, had the rumor not existed that Othello had slept with Emilia, Iago might not have turned these talents onto Othello but rather
onto someone else whom he believed deserved it.
There are unjust and unreasonable rationales behind Iagos motives. For one thing, Iago
is very racist. In Act I, Scene I, here is how he describes to Desdemonas father what Desdemona and Othello are doing: your daughter and the Moor are now making the beast
with two backs (Act I, Scene I, Line 116). Throughout the play, he calls them many more
names, but Iago is himself a racist character. For another, Iago is a sociopath, an evil character for the sake of being evil. He enjoys creating anguish in others, and even more so
does he enjoy watching that anguish. Lastly, even his thinking is more twisted and corrupt
that others. Take the following passages for examples:
Iago. [Aside.] He takes her by the palm; ay,
well said, whisper; with as little a web as this
will I ensnare as great a fly as Cassio. Ay, smile
upon her, do; I will gyve thee in thine own
courtship. You say true, tis so, indeed. If
such tricks as these strip you out of your
lieutenantry, it had been better you had not
kissed your three fingers so oft, which now
again you are most apt to play the sir in.
Very good; well kissed! an excellent courtesy!

Roderigo. Adieu.
Iago. That Cassio loves her, I do well believe it;
That she loves him, tis apt, and of great credit;
The Moor, howbeit that I endure him not,
Is of a constant, loving, noble nature;
And I dare think hell prove to Desdemona
A most dear husband. Now, I do love her too;
Not out of absolute lust, -though peradventure
I stand accountant for as great a sin,-

38

These passages come shortly after they arrive in Cyprus and Iago, Cassio, Emilia, and
Desdemona are all talking and having a good time. In the first passage, Iago is talking
aside. What this is implying is that this is what he is thinking to himself, what he might
even be muttering under his breath so that no others could hear. It shows that he dislikes
Cassio, perhaps because it was Cassio that got the promotion that Iago truly deserved, or
perhaps it is because Cassio had, in Iagos perspective, the nerve to love Desdemona. The
second passage includes one line said by Roderigo. While that one line itself is not as important, what is important is that Iago is not keeping secret this reason for despising Othello. Whether or not this is his main or even a true reason is debatable, but it is an open one
that is clearly acceptable by Roderigo. This is a reason that was meant to be heard by others, as opposed to the aside comment about one-hundred lines earlier. The other key dierence between the two passages that is important is the level of revealed hatred he has for
Othello verses the hatred he has for Cassio. In the more private of the two reasons, Iago
dislikes Cassio and wants him stripped of his position (which, as has been stated before,
Iago does not feel Cassio deserves in the first place). But in the more open reason, he does
not just want to get even with Othello, he wants to humiliate him, to completely destroy
Othello, and even to have Othello be grateful for this humiliation.
There are many perhaps and many speculations with Iagos motives and their significance. There is a reason for this: there are simply too many motives. Too many of Iagos
motives are interconnected with one another that it is nearly impossible to figure out what
is lying at the heart of Iago. Indeed, some of the motives are provided based upon context
clues that might or might not be how Iago truly feels about a subject, and some of the motives are speculative. An example of the former is the statement Iago makes about Desdemona and Othello making the beast with two backs; he could say this for a number of
motives provided: he wanted to create and watch the anguish that would happen within
Desdemonas father, he wanted to slander and insult Othello because he simply despises
him for all hes worth, or he simply wanted to rise up even more ire in her father so as to
take swift and immediate action against Othello rather than letting the Moor defend himself. Given Iagos future successes, this last reason seems unlikely, but once again it could
always have been a test of Othello. An example of the second argument, that some of the
motives are speculative, see the quote above from Act II, Scene I where he describes Cassios
actions in bed. Because Iago describes this scene in such vivid detail, and that he does not
say why he does not wake Cassio up rather than lie limp through it, the audience interprets

39

this as a subconscious homosexual fear and desire within Iago himself. It could simply be
that Iago does not feel any homosexual desires at all but rather wants to further slander
Cassio: if the black Othello is a bestial animal, why not the white Cassio, who is better than
an animal in Iagos mind, be simply homosexual?
Now that Iagos stage has been set, the characters need to be discussed. The first is
Michael Cassio. Iagos dislike for Cassio is rather straight forward on two fronts: number
one, Cassio was given the promotion that ought to have been Iagos; another, he has fallen
in love with Desdemona. Iago has a personality that is very cynical in how he views everyone. O, gentle lady, do not put me tot, / For I am nothing if not critical, he claims in Act
II, Scene I. He has clearly and cleverly deduced all of Cassios actions and feelings, he has
seen the best way to undo this foe and implements it flawlessly. For this mystery, there is
no revelation at the end, where Cassio confronts Iago and proves that he set Cassio up.
Even to the victims of Iagos manipulations themselves do they not realize that they are being played.
Desdemona herself has not wronged Iago per say.

Like Macbeth as he slays those

around in the attempt to get at the main target, Desdemona herself might very well be a bystander. However, given Iagos potential psyche, he might see Desdemonas loving of Othello not only wrong but also an insult to himself. After all, Iago has stated that he too loves
Desdemona, but there are several things to bear in mind with this statement. Number one
is that it was given to another character, so it may not be a real reason but simply one that
Roderigo would have found acceptable. Two, Iagos definition of love would more than likely vary than the conventional definition of love: to Iago, love might be more a possession,
and it might not be unreasonable to him that if he could not have Desdemona for himself
then nobody should have her. Lastly, Iago is indeed not all right in the head, and so even if
he does not love Desdemona, he might not consider her an innocent bystander. Desdemona is to Othello what Emilia is to Iago supposedly, so Iagos revenge on Othello (if it
were to be an equal revenge) would necessarily have to involve Desdemona. In addition, he
considers Othello to be an animal because of who he is and, if his statement to Desdemonas
father is to be trusted, Desdemona too is an animal for choosing to lay with one. In other
words, to Iago, Desdemona might be a wrong that he feels he can and should right, to take
her away from such evil and wicked ways.

40

Lastly is the main target, the primary focus of Iagos machinations. It has already been
speculated that Iago has racist feelings. In addition, it has been speculated that Iago has
homosexual feelings that may be aroused by Othello. Also, it has been seen that Iago does
have some real grievances towards Othello professionally rather than simply personally.
Again, assuming that the mind of the sociopath has a sense of reason that can be understood and followed, Iago hates Othello on several fronts. If Othello is an animal, and Desdemona is an animal for lying with him, and Cassio is despised so called a homosexual
(meaning that homosexuals are despicable), then to Iago who finds himself falling under
several of these categories, he is finding himself to be the focus of everything he hates.
Were to Iago to give into these tendencies, Iago would become the animal that Desdemona
is, and he would become at least as despised as he feels Cassio and Desdemona both are.
Certainly, there is evidence to suggest that Iago does picture himself in Desdemonas position in Othellos eyes, and even usurps that position from her. Consider the next passage:
Iago. Patience, I say; your mind perhaps, may change.
Othello. Never, Iago. Like to the Pontick sea,
Whose icy current and compulsive course
Neer fee;s retiring ebb, but keeps due on
To the Propontic and the Hellespont.
Even so my bloody thoughts, with violent pace,
Shall neer look back, neer ebb to humble love,
Till that a capable and wide revenge
Swallow them up. [Kneels.] Now, by yond marble heaven,
In the due reverence of a sacred vow
I here engage my words.
Iago. Do not rise yet. [Kneels.]
Witness, you ever-burning lights above!
You elements that clip us round about!
Witness, that here Iago doth give up
The execution of his wit, hands, heart,
To wrongd Othellos service! Let him command
And to obey shall be in me remorse,
What bloody business ever.
Act III, Scene III, Lines 453 - 470

Without many context clues, the scene above almost sounds like a marriage ceremony
between Iago and Othello, and in many ways it is exactly that. This is the closest to Othello
Iago has ever gotten, and even closer than many others have gotten to Othello. In fact, given Othellos current feelings towards Desdemona, Iago has actually taken her position.

41

Also, a marriage ceremony is a spoken vow before God for two people to share their lives
together; this is a spoken vow before spiritual witnesses (you ever-burning lights above! /
You elements that clip us about!) for these two people to share the destruction of a live together.
As it has been shown, Iagos character is more unique that most character of Shakespeares. For one, he transcends most of the limits that other characters cannot do. He
takes some of Shakespeares own power and becomes the playwright of the show, making
the people in his life his actors. He is also one of the most accomplished characters, tricking each of the other characters so well that they dont even know that they have been
tricked, ever. He even gets away with stealing the title of the play away from the main character without him ever being aware of it. Iagos actions make him one of, if not the most
cunning and evil characters Shakespeare has ever created; his motivates for doing these acts
are many, marking him as one of the most convoluted Shakespearean characters ever.

42

Piece of Evidence #4 : Showcase of my Abilities

This essay was written for my Sixteenth Century English Literature
class, which I took in the spring of 2009 with Wayne Erickson. I am particularly proud of this essay, not because I succeeded in convincing Mr.
Erickson of my point (I didnt at first), but because of how perceptive I was
when writing this essay. No one else in the class saw anything like this
when discussing Utopia.

43

The Loss of Ingenuity

Throughout the island people wear, and down through the centuries they have always
worn, the same style of clothing except for the distinction between the sexes, and between
married and unmarried persons.

Their clothing is attractive, does not hamper bodily

movement, and serves for warm as well as cold weather; what is more, each household can
make its own (550). This line from Book 2 of Sir Thomas Mores Utopia immediately suggests that the people of Utopia are bland and unimaginative. However, the more serious
implications include the loss of ingenuity, and this is demonstrated clearly not just in this
passage but in others as well. By considering these passages and the definition of the word
ingenuity, it will be made clear why the Utopians have subsequently lost their ingenuity.
While the Utopians originally had their ingenuity the same as other people, it would
appear that through the ages they have not retained it. To use the colloquial phrase, ingenuity is a use it or lose it kind of thing. And while people might be able to argue against
this, claiming that the Utopians have their ingenuity but have no need to use it, it will been
shown that they did have need of it and were unable to call upon it.
The first passage mentioned above demonstrates a lack of ingenuity; not only that but
this also demonstrates that the Utopians have lost a value of choice. The first line of the
passage lets the reader know that there is no dierence in style. There is no imaginative decisions made when picking out clothing, there is no opportunity for some member of the
Utopian society to say, I feel like wearing black today instead of the usual brown. The
only possible evidence that the Utopians do indeed have a choice is in few situations.
Take this a step further, and move away from the subject of clothing for a minute. First,
there is the situation of whether or not the Utopians choose to do work. They are able to
not do their days labors and instead wander o to do to whatever; however, doing so would
grant them no food for the day and possible angering of the Utopians superiors. Secondly,
there is the possibility of choice when it comes to gardening. Although More never mentions what attributes of the gardens the Utopians find most desirable, it could be that they
may prefer those that are pleasantly landscaped (which would imply a great deal of choice,
creativity, and possibly ingenuity) or those with the healthiest plants(which would imply
none of the mentioned attributes). Lastly, the is the possibility that the Utopians have a

44

choice in their food. If they have knowledge and ingredients, it is possible that the choice of
what they are able to eat would be an active process (again, implying choice and creativity);
however, it could be instead that the Utopians eat the same thing that they have always eaten. Again, More does not provide great detail in this area.
The next bit of the quote reads, Their clothing is attractive, does not hamper bodily
movement, and serves for warm as well as cold weather (550). This would at first seem to
disprove the claim stated earlier. After all, a society that creates a single set of clothing that
can serve nearly all occasions must have developed through the ingenuity of the people at
some point, in this case the first Utopians. This is supported by the fact that the clothing
style and function has not changed. The definition of ingenuity provided by the Oxford
English Dictionary states that it is the quality of being clever, original, and inventive. The
first Utopian(s) that created the clothing style were certainly clever with their design, they
were inventive with it, and it seems to be rather original as it was the first piece of clothing
for them. However, as time has passed, no changes have been made to the clothing style.
Reconsider the last part of the opening passage: what is more, each household can
make its own (550). This here is the main piece of evidence for supporting the claim that
there is a loss of ingenuity in this society: not only is the clothing the same style for each
member in the society, but each member of the society basically crafts their own clothing.
No sense of design or style goes in, and this demonstrates that even when creating the
clothing no individual thought goes through their mind.
A possible counter-point to this claim would be the popular phrase from Platos The Republic: Necessity, who is the mother of invention. The word ingenuity comes from the
Latin word ingenuus meaning inborn. Nowhere in the definition does it say that ingenuity
arises from a need. While Platos statement is generally correct, it is not always a requirement. The Utopians, if they possessed it still, would display their ingenuity in some fashion.
However, and this will be supported in another passage, the Utopians have grown complacent with their lifestyle and as such have not shown any ingenuity and have most likely lost
it through disuse.
Suppose for a moment that Platos statement about necessity is indeed a requirement
(no where is it stated as such, but for this purpose suppose it is so). If this were true, then
the example provided earlier about the clothing never changing would not be enough to

45

dissuade the counter-point. Instead, take a passage from Book 1: The seamen were skilled
in managing wind and water; but they were most grateful to [Raphael Hythlodae] for
showing them the use of the compass, of which they had been ignorant. For that reason,
they had formerly sailed with great timidity, and only in summer. Now they have such trust
in the compass that they no longer fear winter at all, and tend to be overconfident rather
than cautious (527). The people of Utopia were unable to sail during the winter, something that once they were able to do so they did with alarming speed. There was clearly a
need to sail in winter given how quickly they decided to do so, and yet they were unable to
find a way to do that on their own. So when there was need for it, the Utopians were unable
to be clever, original, or inventive but instead had to rely on another for aid. In other
words, even when there was need for it, they were shown to have lost their ingenuity.
There is an obvious corollary between ingenuity and creativity. Two of the three qualities of ingenuity are often taken to be requirements of creativity, and a second counter-point
would be to show that the Utopians to actively practice forms of creativity in the two games
they have created. There are two problems disproving the claim that the Utopians lack ingenuity. They do play two games not unlike our own chess. One is a battle of numbers, in
which one number captures another. The other is a game in which the vices fight a battle
against virtues. Neither of the two games seem to be rather original as they are not unlike
our own chess. Even if they are not based on chess, if the two games are rather similar to
chess then they must be similar to each other at the least, and so at least one of the games is
not original.
Utopians probably had, back in their beginnings, the use of ingenuity. However, either
through lack of need or, the more likely, through lack of use, the Utopians no longer had it.
Even when there was need of it, they were unable to call upon it.

46

Piece of Evidence # 5 : Ten Influences

This essay was written in my last semester at Georgia State University
specifically for this portfolio. However, this essay has been written in my
head throughout the years as well as having been written in short parts in
various iterations, usually focusing on just one or two influences. This was
also the topic of my essays for the Georgia Assessments for the Certification of Educators exams, again asking about a single work of literature that
has been of great influence to us as future educators. These ten influences
are: Hamlet, the Merchant of Venice, and Othello, the Moor of Venice by
William Shakespeare, the Hobbit by John Ronald Reuel Tolkien, Shgun by
James Clavell, American Gods by Neil Gaiman, The Elfstones of Shannara by
Terry Brooks, Redwall by Brian Jacques, and the various Harry Potter novels by Joanne Jo Rowling. I group the seven Harry Potter novels together as one because the inspiration is the seven pieces as a whole rather than
as seven individual novels.

Ten Influences
Over the course of my life I have been influenced by various works of literature. The ten
that stand out strongest in my mind of strong influences is not the the collection of stories
as a whole that would be required reading for a well-rounded education, but these are the
works of literature that have shaped me to be who I am.
I was inspired to write creatively at a young age. I cannot quite pin down what inspired
me first to put into words games I played in my head with my brother back in elementary
school, but I can tell you the various works of literature that shaped those ideas. The first
and most influential to me of these novels is The Elfstones of Shannara. Written by Terry
Brooks in 1982, this was the second novel in his Shannara series (more novels have been
added as prequels since then). This continues to this day to be a strong inspiration to me
on several levels. I have always enjoyed the fantastical, the realms of magic and of adventure, and it is usually on these subjects that I constantly write. This writing, the rules of
magic and its interactions with the natural world, have been heavily shaped by the rules of
Brookss world. Mostly prominently of these is the idea that magic always takes its toll on
the user. Throughout the novel the character is aided by Allanon, the last Druid and historian of the Four Lands, who takes the role of mentor, guide, and almost brother-like figure
to the hero Wil Ohmsford. As a Druid, Allanon has command of very powerful magic,
longevity, and is known as keeper of secrets and a teller of half-truths. In many ways, he is
seen through the eyes of commoners like Wil Ohmsford almost as though he were a god,
unconquerable, ominpotent, eternal. Allanon has almost single-handedly defeated an army
of demons, each with powers as great as his own. At the end of the novel, with their missions complete, Wil Ohmsford is visited by Allanon only to see an aged and tired man
rather than the strong, enigmatic Druid he was at the start. This image stuck with me over
the years, of how we watch our heroes perform their acts of greatness and never once consider the implications of such actions, the toll that these awe-inspiring feats take on our
idols, that nothing is forever and everyone must pay the price in the end.
Another novel on the fantasy genre that inspired me is the Hobbit. Unlike The Elfstones
of Shannara, John Ronald Reuel Tolkiens work is almost legendary. Published in 1937, it
almost single-handedly created the fantasy genre as we know it today.

So naturally it

should make the list of a fantasy-lover like myself, right? Yes, but not for the reasons that
one would initially think. I read the Hobbit in the fourth grade at the insistence of my
teacher and parents. I hated every moment of it. Seven years later, I tried reading the sequel to the Hobbit and hated that even more so. It wasnt the genre or the plot or even the
characters that drew my ire; it was the writing style. Tolkien wrote during a time when one
was paid by the word, so having several pages dedicated to the description of a single character was not so ridiculous. However, to me in this day, the idea of spending so much time
on a character is almost laughable. Its not that the time and eort doesnt need to be spent,
but rather the way in which Tolkien wrote it was simply a set of narrative lines about the
physical appearance of such a character. This cemented in my mind the idea that a good
writer should show rather than just tell, and it is for this that I credit the Hobbit for the influence it has on me rather than just its legacy.
A third novel for me that served as inspiration is Interview With The Vampire. Written
by Anne Rice in 1973 and published in 1976, this novel introduced the fan-favorite character of Lestat. Among everything else, Rice is well known for the modern romanticized version and appearance of vampires. The strength of these novels and their inspiration lay in
the characters and in their tales. Despite the supernatural that surrounds these powerful
creatures of the night, it is exceedingly simple to sympathize with them. It is this quality in
Rices vampires that I try my best to emulate with any characters I choose to bring to life.
The fourth novel I have chosen is not actually a single novel. Rather, it is a collection of
seven books. Written by Joanne Jo Rowling, the Harry Potter novels are grouped together
for the purposes of this classification for one reason: the books have been an inspiration to
me as a whole rather than as separate works. The first reason they make this list is because
of the characters. Readers get to see an eleven-year-old Harry mature and grow up into the
seventeen-year-old hero we expected him to become, and we find that it is not the wizardry
part that captivates us as much as it is the human aspects. Rowling has a talent for capturing the thoughts of youths and recalling in our minds what it really was like to be Harrys
age, from the awkwardness of his first day at a new school to those embarrassing moments
he has seeing his first crush to the feelings of anger as it seems the whole world is against
him. The second reason is two-part. Rowling is an incredible mystery writer, and these
novels were written a handful of years ago. It is a unique experience trying to solve mysteries that the entire world is trying to solve at the same time, with no one able to spoil the
ending for you. The clues are scattered throughout the first six novels, making one reread

49

the same work over and over again, each time discovering a new piece of the puzzle. The
second part is that because these works of literature are so contemporary at this point, it
makes nearly every paper written on them an original idea. There are no teachers giving
lectures on these books, no grad students consulting article after article that have been written through the centuries about what an author Rowling was. Those breakthroughs, those
analyses about Rowling as a writer and the deeper meanings in her novels, all those things
will be discovered and written about by the very people sitting next to me in my classes. It
will be the generation of people I know, and it is something special to be able to take part in
that.
Not all works of literature that have inspired me have been fantasy-based. The play the
Merchant of Venice for instance has been a great inspiration to me on many parts. I first
read this work of William Shakespeares back in high school and, being Jewish, found that it
struck a cord with me. On the one hand the play was horribly antisemitic in its portrayal of
Shylock; on the other hand he was a writer catering to his audience. The Merchant of Venice
is controversial now for several reasons not the least of which is that having once been considered a comedy it is now perceived as a tragedy. This fact alone is the source of inspiration for me from this novel. If it took hundreds of years for the world to see a work like the
Merchant of Venice in a completely dierent light, how will we see novels dierently? How
will people perceive the novels we write? Id like to think that our interpretation of todays
works is correct, but so did they in their time. And so I keep in my mind that healthy
amount of skepticism when thinking about which novels to teach and how to interpret
them. I try to use this outsiders perspective when analyzing works of literature in an attempt to understand it from all points of view, and I do likewise whenever I write something.
Another great work by William Shakespeare that does inspire me is Othello, the Moor of
Venice. This source of inspiration is actually a combination of the work and the teacher
who taught it. Dr. James Hirsh has an incredible understanding of Shakespeare and his
works, and his lectures on the character of Iago are really inspiring. As seen in the third
piece of evidence I have provided, entire papers can and have been written on the study of
this single character. This inspired me to do likewise with other characters, others as well
as my own. What drives each character to do the things they do? What motives do they
give? What motives do we see? Can we trust what they say or what they do? These questions drive me to look deeper to characters and to find meaning in every possible place.

50

My third and last work of Shakespeares that serves as an inspiration is Hamlet, and like
Othello, it has a lot to do with the course I took rather than just its significance. After
studying this single work for an entire semester with Dr. Hirsh, it is hard not to have your
thoughts and writing process altered by it. This isnt a bad thing, however, because there are
so many dierent angles to it that it makes you want to have your work analyzed in such a
way, and I have learned to read from every angle with other literary works. Is Hamlet the
hero for avenging his father or the victim for dying in the plays conclusion; or is he even
the villain for his hand in Ophelias death, his mothers unhappiness, his uncles death, and
the conquering of his country by an outside power? Is Claudius the villain for the murder
of his brother, or his a patriot for protecting his country in the way his brother never could?
It is questions like these that I put to other novels and to my own, and it helps me to understand a deeper meaning to the works.
Another novel that inspired me is Shgun, a historic novel based upon the travels of
Williams Adams as he explored 1600 Japan and helped give rise to the Tokugawa Shogunate. This novel was the primary source of analysis and presentation for my senior seminar
course in literary analysis. One of the fun things I learned to do from this novel is to analyze other novels around it. As this was the first novel chronologically in his Asian Saga but
his third novel published, I analyzed it along with his first published Asian story King Rat.
Drawing parallels between those two novels and bringing in outside research to distinguish
fact from fiction was an invigorating experience that really shaped how much analysis I
should do in all my reading assignments. By understanding what events were happening at
the time of the writing as well as the events that inspired the writings in the first place, one
gets a deeper understanding of the authors style.
One of the last novels that inspired me, and to bring everything to a full circle, is a fantasy novel written by Brian Jacques. Redwall is the tale of a mouse who becomes a hero to
save his abbey from a horde of invading rats. It is a novel of medieval romance that brings
to mind tales of Arthurian legend as Matthias takes up the legendary sword of Martin the
Warrior and find in the name of justice and peace. I read this at a young age, and I was enamored by it. It shaped nearly everything else I have chosen to read and I have written.
The honor of knights, valor of the brave few against many, it is these qualities that shape
many of the characters that I write.

51

Religion and mythology have always played a big part in shaping who am I and where
my interests lie. With American Gods, I found a new outlet for those interests. Written by
Neil Gaiman, American Gods follows the tale of Shadow, a mysterious man who sees his recently dead wife walking the earth and performs various work for a man named Mr.
Wednesday. As Shadow performs his work, he discovers that Mr. Wednesday and friends
are the American reincarnations of various Old World gods like Odin, Loki, Anubis, and
Anansi, who are preparing for a war with New World gods like the Internet and media.
This novel gave birth to several ideas to me. The first is that Gaiman had a knack fro crafting names that were obvious and deceptive at the same time: Low Key Lyesmith is really
Loki Lie-smith, Mr. Wednesday is Odin (Wodens day is Wednesday), Mr. Jacquel is Anubis, et cetera. The other is that things are given life and significance by the people who use
and believe in them. The New Gods are created because everyone knows they must exist.

52

Piece of Evidence #6 : Alternate Path to Literary Analysis

This was a monthly lesson plan for November that I created as project
for my Senior Seminar in Secondary Education. The goal of this lesson
plan was to spend the month of November analyzing two single works
from two dierent time periods and draw inspirations to improve the students writing. The reason this was planned for November is that November is National Novel Writing Month, and part of this lesson plan
would facilitate the students writing for and, if they desired, submitting
their own work online for the National Novel Writing Month contest at
www.NaNoWriMo.org. The time would be spaced out between writing at
a computer lab to accommodate those who do not have equal access to
computers, workshopping each others work in the classroom, and the
study of literature by breaking it down to basic components and focusing
on key details, which in this case would be primarily character and plot
analysis.

Alternate Path to Literary Analysis

Objective(s)
M
O
N
D
A
Y

1 November - Explanation of National Novel Writing Month (NaNoWriMo); begin

Othello, the Moor of Venice by W. Shakespeare
8 November - Continue Othello, the Moor of Venice by W. Shakespeare
15 November - Begin Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix by J. K. Rowling
22 November - Continue Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix by J. K. Rowling
29 November - Extra workshopping time to finish writing for NaNoWriMo
X

Activity(s)

Lecture

Media Present.

X Group Discussion

Q&A

Guided Pract.

Independ. Pract.

Review Homework

Library/
Lab

Quiz

Exam/Test

Stud. Presentation

Re-Teach

Objective(s) 2 November - Character Analysis and Character Profiles

T
U
E
S
D
A
Y

9 November - Character Analysis, focusing on Iago

16 November - Character Analysis, focusing on Harry Potter
23 November - Character Motivations
30 November - Extra lab time to finish writing for NaNoWriMo
X Lecture

Activity(s)

Media Present.

X Group Discussion

Q&A

Guided Pract.

Independ. Pract.

X Review
Homework.

Library/
Lab

Quiz

Exam/Test

Stud. Presentation

Re-Teach

Objective(s) Workshopping of Previous Writings

W
E
D
N
E
S
D
A
Y

3 November - Guidelines to Workshopping

10 November - Workshop 1
17 November - Workshop 2
24 November - Workshop 3
31 November - Workshop 4

Activity(s)

Lecture

Media Present.

X Group Discussion

Q&A

Guided
Practice

Independ. Pract.

X Review
Homework

Library/
Lab

Quiz

Exam/Test

Stud. Presentation

Re-Teach

Objective(s) 4 November - Plot analysis and event outlining

T
H
U
R
S
D
A
Y

11 November - Plot analysis of Othello, Moor of Venice

18 November - Plot analysis of NaNoWriMo submission
25 November - Plot analysis of Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix
1 December - Review for Quiz
Lecture

Activity(s)

Guided Pract.
Quiz

Media Present.
X Independ. Pract.
Exam/Test

Group Discussion

Q&A

Review Homework

Library

Student
Presentation

Re-Teach

Objective(s) Computer-Lab: Time to be Spent Writing

F
R
I
D
A
Y

5 November - Introduction to the Lab, word processing, editing, and Track Changes
function
12 November - Lab Time 1
19 November - Lab Time 2
26 November - Lab Time 3
2 December - Quiz
Lecture

Activity(s)

Guided Pract.
X Quiz

Media Present.
X Independ. Pract.
Exam/Test

55

Group Discussion
Review Homework
Stud. Presentation

Q&A
X Library
Re-Teach

Section III
Reflective Essay

56

R E F L E C T I V E E S S AY
I began writing in the fifth grade, and have continued writing up to this day. My style as
a writer has undergone many changes from many dierent sources. Some of those come
from the novels I have read, such as Redwall, Othello, and the Hobbit, while other sources
have come from teachers like Dr. King-Rogers who taught the creative writing course I took
in high school or Dr. James Hirsh who is an incredible Shakespeare professor at Georgia
State University. My style has changed dramatically as a result, beginning with the way I
look at characters. The biggest part of my writing and planning is the development of characters. Motivations, rationales, these qualities are sometimes more important to me that
the plot of the story. I want my readers to understand who these characters are, why they
do the things they do, and what they can expect them to do. I want my readers to believe
that these people are real people, that they act as one would expect them to act, and that
they are not just flu which serves a purpose.
The biggest problem I have is that I care too much about my characters. This problem is
present in many peoples writings. If you go online and read any webcomics, chances are
you will find that they reach a point where everyone is happy. Oftentimes, these authors
take time introducing conflict into these situations because to them, more so than to anyone else, these characters are real and it is heartbreaking to make them unhappy. This is the
problem I find myself it as direct result of putting too much emphasis on character development. Even the villains of the story, whose goal it is to destroy the world or alter it in
some fashion, have their reasons that makes me sympathetic to their plight. The only way I
have to overcome it is to just persevere, reminding yourself that this is what has to happen
to progress the story and that, for those who are still alive at least, it gets better for them.
I have been able to demonstrate a greater understanding of the literature I have studied
by tying it in together with the subjects of my writing. Understanding Christopher Marlowe helps in understanding Shakespeare, and understanding Mary Shelley helps in understanding Byron. I cannot say I have a mastery of the literature I have studied because I do
not believe that such a thing can be achieved. The study of literature is an ongoing, continual, and evolving process. There will always be new breakthroughs and new ideas, and so
all I can claim is a understanding of my literature, the desire to learn more, and to pass on
that knowledge.

57

Because of the ways I have been taught and educated, my method of reading and research has broadened considerably.

My particular methods revolve around characters.

Why someone acts the way they do, why they say the thing they do, and how much they can
be trusted in their actions are some of my favorite things to ask. While this is primarily a
result of my studies at Georgia State, it has impacted me greatly in not only the way I read
but also the way I intend to teach. One could spend an entire semester studying just one
character and still not learn everything there is to know about that character.
The first and foremost thing that has fostered my growth as both a reader and a researcher are the novels I have read. It would be very dicult for me to research a story and
an author that I have very little interest in. The second aspect has been the teachers I have
had. The ways in which they have taught us to perform our research or how to read our
stories is generally the way I default to do my own research and reading. Lastly has been
the invention and widespread use of the internet. I am familiar with methods of performing research without such aid, but nothing has facilitated the progress of research better or
changed our default actions more drastically than such tools as Journal Storage (JSTOR), the
Modern Language Association (MLA) International Database, GALILEO, and even
Wikipedia.org. Now, when researching an author or a novel, whether its for a last minute
fact or spelling verification or, in some extremes, a starting point, the average student will
now consult article databases and Google.
The most important thing I have learned about linguistic structures and analyzing how
they contribute to the meaning of the text is to remember that nothing exists in a vacuum.
When Hamlet provides his To Be soliloquy, he is not saying those lines just for the purpose of saying those lines, but rather he is putting on his continued act of insanity and depression for his audience of Polonius and whoever else might be listening to him.
There is truth in the old phrase practice makes perfect. Knowing the theory helps in
understanding the material, but unless one writes upon it, researches it, actively seeks to get
a deeper understanding of what it is they are reading, their understanding of the source will
remain incomplete. And so I would teach students to read as I have done, to think outside
the box and look for reasons, do the research, and write on the subject, all for the sake of
understanding the text better.

58

I have learned many things from my English Department teachers. The first I have
learned, through both good examples as well as poor ones, is to always be prepared for
class. There have been teachers who cannot remember what chapters have been read, and
there have been teachers who fail to have their presentations ready. Consistently, they have
had a poor understanding of the technology in the room, leading to half the class wasted
trying to play a video. On the other hand, I have had teachers who work with what they
have, teachers who are so good at their lectures and their subjects that students rarely have
to question them on the basics and instead can focus on the finer details and the nuances of
their subjects. Another thing I have learned is to be flexible. I have seen teachers who are
underprepared and must fill the gaps in as best they can, and they usually fail to both hold
the classs attention and teach anything useful in that unplanned for time. Conversely, I
have had teachers who have consistently over-planned for their classes, failing to account
for extensive questions, pauses, or other distractions and fail to teach the entirety of the
text.
One cannot teach simply by reading the theory. Performing research for literary analysis teaches one to look past the surface of the text and ask the big questions of the author:
why did they write this; who are they writing for; where is the inspiration coming from for
this; who is their audience? As far as reading goes, knowledge doesnt exist in a vacuum.
You might not need to have read Julius Caesar to understand Doctor Faustus, but knowing
who Oedipus is and what his story is allows one to draw connections to Hamlet that would
otherwise not be made. If you write, then you read. The best path to understanding an author is to write about that author. Perhaps while writing an analysis of Utopia you discover
that the people are lacking in the area of ingenuity, or maybe while quoting Shakespeare in
one of your own novels you suddenly understand better how Cleopatra felt when she knew
what fate awaited her in Rome. By writing, you are passing down knowledge, which is the
inherent goal of teachers.

By researching, you are absorbing the knowledge of others,

which is the inherent goal of students. And by reading, you are engaging in critical analysis, the single most defining trait of being human.
A. How has your language knowledge influenced your thinking about language teaching?
For the month of May in 2009, I took a class entitled the History of the English Language with professor Scott Lightsey here at Georgia State University. In his class I have
learned several things about the English language that I never knew and explained so much.

59

Because of his course, I learned much about Old English, Middle English, and the evolution
of English as it survived conquerers and religious oppressions. Because of this, I have a better understanding not just about texts like Beowulf and Chaucer, but it helps in understanding the way in which language evolves, how flexible of a language it is, and how one person
could expand the language so much simply through his plays. In addition to this understanding of the English language, I have tried my hand an many other languages with the
same conclusion each time: I have no aptitude for them, but they are necessary. The world
is getting metaphorically smaller, and the days when one nation could bully the others to
adopting their policies and language are gone. Books are being translated into dozens of
other languages all the time, and understanding a language helps understand a people. For
example, the Chinese character for a happy house is the character for pig under a roof,
while the character for a happy family is two characters for pig under a roof. That understanding alone tells us what the Chinese eat and how often they eat it, all without ever having to go to China or ask someone.
I plan to pass on my knowledge in the same way I have gained it: through careful readings, through student research, and through successful teaching. Holding the students attention by relating what they are reading to what they already know, for instance. The students could write a report on Hamlet by comparing it to the Disney film The Lion King, or
explaining how the rewrite of the chapter Riddles in the Dark of the Hobbit brings it more
in line with the sequel the Lord of the Rings. My strength and interest lay with more contemporary works, things published within the last fifty years. It is a unique position because there will eventually, I believe, be classes dedicated to the study of J. K. Rowlings novels at schools like Georgia State, but right now it is a field that is of interest to the students
with no teachers to guide them.

60