As the old saying goes, there is nothing new under the sun. This colloquialism applies, obviously to everything under the sun, including familial relationships. What may have been the case in the 1600s, was also happening in the 1800s as well as in 2010. Families have been around since the inception of time, with the intricacies that encompass those relationships. Sometimes relationships are easy, and not the victims of years of dysfunction. Other times, they are fraught with historical difficulties that are born out in the lives of family members, sometimes for generations to come. This is evidenced in the plays “Hamlet,” by William Shakespeare, and “A Doll’s House,” by Henrik Ibsen. These two plays demonstrate the timelessness and effects of dysfunctional families on their characters and in the lives of those affected by the issues with which they deal.
Question #1. In the two plays “A Hamlet,” and “A Doll’s House,” there are many examples of dysfunctional families. What members of the families are in specific dysfunctional relationships with what specific other members of the families, and how are these dysfunctions played out?
Second Question: The characters in each play do extreme things to deal with their dysfunctions. What are those things, how are they alike or different, and what can be learned about the characters from how they react to bad situations?
ReplyDeleteHamlet was written in approximately 1600. Although structurally a family is a family, in Prince Hamlet’s case his family was, to borrow a common phrase, “messed up.” “Historians have long established that families in the past, much like many contemporary families, exhibited their share of conflict, abuse, and violence.” (Halevi, 2009) Hamlet’s Uncle Claudius murdered his own brother, King Hamlet, and married the king’s wife and Prince Hamlet’s mother, Gertrude. So intense was his jealousy over the fact that King Hamlet had the throne, the queen, and the heir, that he resorted to a diabolical crime in order to get his way. Upon an initial perusal, the reader would likely just be shocked at the way that a brother would treat a brother, but when analyzed psychologically, dysfunctions within the family become apparent. What had happened in their childhoods that would cause Claudius to be so jealous of his brother? Had he always been the favored one simply because of birth order? Had Claudius been overlooked because he wasn’t the heir apparent? It could be argued, with a good deal of probability, that the jealousy that caused him to take not only his brother’s life, but wife as well, had existed since childhood. This desire that Claudius had for revenge against something outside of King Hamlet’s control resulted in the murder of the King. That same dysfunctional lust to make things seem right was held by Prince Hamlet, once he found that his uncle had murdered his father. (Shakespeare, 2010, pg. 1376) The dysfunction that likely began before the two brothers were even conceived, found its fruition in the deaths of many of the family members.
ReplyDeleteHi! Since the conversation is on Hamlet so far, here's my two cents worth. I think that jealousy is often a precursor to dysfunctional relationships. As Claudius seethed with jealousy over his brother Hamlet’s throne, he degenerated into performing the heinous act of killing his brother (I.v.25). Later in Act I, scene 5, King Hamlet’s ghost delineated the method by which his brother took his life – poisoning while the King retired in the garden. Also in this scene, when the ghost spoke with Hamlet, he additionally addressed the matter of his brother Claudius having taken his wife as his own shortly after the untimely death of Hamlet Sr. One must wonder just what it was that Claudius was seeking, the queen, or the throne. Was the queen a way to the throne? The dysfunction that contributes to this jealousy is rampant in the life of Claudius. This jealous obsession is another sign of dysfunctional relationships (Urell, 2005).
ReplyDeleteThis relational dis-ease has many effects. The first and foremost, is the death of King Hamlet. Another sign of dysfunction in families is “emotional blocks: Fear, jealousy, obsession, non-involvement, manipulation, distrust, suspicion, disrespect and an uncaring attitude are the usual suspects.” (Urell, 2005) This symptom was seen in Prince Hamlet as he sought to avenge his father’s death. He eventually directly killed Polonius (III.iv.26) and Laertes (V.ii.279) by the sword, Ophelia indirectly (IV.vii.164) because she drowned herself because of the death of Polonius at Hamlet’s unwitting hand. Claudius and Gertrude also met their demise, Claudius by the poisoned sword (V.ii.294) and Gertrude indirectly at Hamlet’s hand, being poisoned during the sword fight with Laertes (V.ii.277).Without the issues that had been between the king and his brother, Hamlet would not have had to deal with the problem of revenge, making the revenge itself a result of the initial act created by the dysfunctional jealousy between the brothers.
TJoy, Those are good points. I never thought of the eventual deaths as the result of dysfunction. I always just thought about the anger and eventual revenge that one would feel upon finding out about the death of a parent at the hand of an uncle. Good correlation!
ReplyDeleteNice work ladies! How about "A Doll's House?"
ReplyDeleteOK, my turn here! In the play “A Doll’s House,” by Henrik Ibsen, a different type of dysfunction is chronicled. Rather than dysfunction between blood family members, this primary issue is between husband and wife. Written in 1879, the playwright challenged the mores by which society viewed women. “A Doll's House aroused controversy because the play features a female protagonist seeking individuality.” (Gosse) “In the context of society as a whole, particularly in political and economic arenas, women’s power declined.” (Rotman, 2005) Thus, women were looked down upon societally. Torvald was a businessman, enmeshed in the political and monetary life of the culture in which he lived. Since women were diminished in society and he was entrenched in that society, it stands to reason that he could diminish Nora at home. This debasement is obvious in the play. “Is that my little lark twittering out there? . . . It is my little squirrel bustling around? . . . My little skylark mustn’t let her wings droop. Is my little squirrel sulking? Nora, what do you think I’ve got here?” (as he gets a monetary treat out for her) (Ibsen, 2010, pg. 1559, 60). This patronizing, superior attitude from Torvald to Nora is not healthy, and a symptom of dysfunction in marital relationships (John Friel and Linda Friel, 1988).
ReplyDeleteHmmm...I'm not so sure that I agree with some of what you say Lucille. Yes, Torvald patronized Nora; that goes without question. I don't know if I would call that dysfunction though. That was the way that women were treated in the time! I read on another class's webpage that "while men and women were supposed to be the breadwinners, the women were supposed to care for the home and the children." It wasn't patronizing so much as the time period (Coleman, 2008).
ReplyDeleteAnother symptom of a dysfunctional marriage is feeling cornered (Urell, 2005). Nora felt trapped in her stifling marriage, evidenced in the final conversation that she and Torvald had in Act III. “We’ve been married for eight years. Doesn’t it occur to you that this is the first time the two of us, you and I, husband and wife, have had a serious conversation?” (Ibsen, 2010, pg. 1605) Later, she said “That’s just it. You’ve never understood me. I’ve been treated badly, Torvald . . . by you.” (Ibsen, 2010, pg. 1605). Nora felt trapped in her relationship, and didn’t see any option but to leave even her children, to try and find emotional health. “Goodbye, Torvald. I won’t look in on the children. I know they’re in better hands than mine. The way I am now, I’m no use to them.” (Ibsen, 2010, pg. 1609) The ultimate sacrifice on Nora’s part was to go away to find herself, apart from Torvald and his controlling nature (his dysfunction) so that she could become whole.
ReplyDeleteAnother symptom of a dysfunctional marriage is feeling cornered (Urell, 2005). Nora felt trapped in her stifling marriage, evidenced in the final conversation that she and Torvald had in Act III. “We’ve been married for eight years. Doesn’t it occur to you that this is the first time the two of us, you and I, husband and wife, have had a serious conversation?” (Ibsen, 2010, pg. 1605) Later, she said “That’s just it. You’ve never understood me. I’ve been treated badly, Torvald . . . by you.” (Ibsen, 2010, pg. 1605). Nora felt trapped in her relationship, and didn’t see any option but to leave even her children, to try and find emotional health. “Goodbye, Torvald. I won’t look in on the children. I know they’re in better hands than mine. The way I am now, I’m no use to them.” (Ibsen, 2010, pg. 1609) The ultimate sacrifice on Nora’s part was to go away to find herself, apart from Torvald and his controlling nature (his dysfunction) so that she could become whole.
ReplyDeleteOK, I'm going to wrap this discussion up here. From 1600, to 1879, to 2010, dysfunctional relationships have been a part of many families’ existences. Troubled relationships, whether in the forms of jealousy, obsession, manipulation and violence, or superiority/inferiority issues, all lead to a sense of dis-ease in families and often to their demise. This was the case in Shakespeare’s Hamlet and in Ibsen’s A Doll’s House. The issues that had never been dealt with caused multiple deaths in Hamlet and the dissolution of a marriage in A Doll’s House. Problems left unresolved do not just disappear; they cause even more problems. Although these plays were written for the viewing pleasure of a play’s audience, they both contain lessons that are as relevant in 2010 as they were in 1600 of 1879: deal with issues and move forward.
ReplyDeleteWorks Cited
ReplyDeleteColeman, G. C. (2008). The Family and Class Structure in Mid-19th Century Europe. Retrieved
June 14, 2010, from Suffolk County Community College Department of Social Sciences:
http://www2.sunysuffolk.edu/westn/familyclass.html
Friel, John and Linda. (1988). Adult Children: The Secrets of Dysfunctional Families. Deerfield Beach, Florida: Health Communications.
Halevi, S. (2009). A Variety of Domestic Misfortunes, Writing the Dysfuntional Self in Early America. Early Aemrican Literature, 95-119.
Rotman, D. L. (2005). Newlyweds, Young Families, and Spinsters: A Consideration of Development Cycle in Historical Archaelogies of Gender. International Journal of Historical Archeology.
Shakespeare, W. (2010). Hamlet. In X. J. Kennedy and Dana Gioia, Drama (p. 1376). New York: Longman.
Urell, B. (2005). Signs of a Dysfunctional Family. Retrieved June 14, 2010, from ArticleSnatch: http://www.articlesnatch.com/Article/Are-You-A-Victim-Of-Dysfunctional-Relationships--9-Warning-Signs/201375
Tricia, you did an excellent job with this project. Not only did you present the content of comparing the theme of dysfunctional family consequences, but you did a great job of establishing the personnas of the instructor and several students.
ReplyDeleteYou wove the quotes and references into the blog seamlessly. This project was a pleasure to read.
I wish you well as you implement blogs into you classroom. Have a great summer.