The Character of Gertrude in Shakespeares Hamlet Essay -- GCSE Course

The Character of Gertrude in Shakespeare's Hamlet The Gertrude in Shakespeare’s tragic drama Hamlet is controversial in the sense that some critics uphold her morality and some deny it. Let’s consider this question and others related to this character. Gertrude has many good qualities in the play; she is not evil through and through. Rebecca Smith in â€Å"Scheming Adulteress or Loving Mother† presents an image of the queen in Shakespeare’s Hamlet that is perhaps not consistent with that presented by the ghost: Although she may have been partially responsible for Claudius’ monstrous act of fratricide and although her marriage to Claudius may have been indirectly responsible for making a â€Å"monster† of Hamlet, Gertrude is never seen in the play inducing anyone to do anything at all monstrous. . . . When one closely examines Gertrude’s actual speech and actions in an attempt to understand the character, one finds little that hints at hypocrisy, suppression, or uncontrolled passion and their implied complexity. . . . She speaks plainly, directly and chastely when she does speak. . . .(81-82) Gunnar Bokland in â€Å"Hamlet† describes Gertrude’s moral descent during the course of Shakespeare’s Hamlet: With Queen Gertrude and finally also Laertes deeply involved in a situation of increasing ugliness, it becomes clear that, although Claudius and those who associate with him are not the incarnations of evil that Hamlet sees in them, they are corrupt enough from any balanced point of view, a condition that is also intimated by the â€Å"heavy-headed revel† that distinguishes life at the Danish court. (123) Gertrude’s â€Å"contamination† does indeed affect the hero. Courtney Lehmann and Lisa S. Starks in "Making Mother Matter: ... ...//ds.dial.pipex.com/thomas_larque/ham1-col.htm Jorgensen, Paul A. â€Å"Hamlet.† William Shakespeare: the Tragedies. Boston: Twayne Publ., 1985. N. pag. http://www.freehomepages.com/hamlet/other/jorg-hamlet.html Lehmann, Courtney and Lisa S. Starks. "Making Mother Matter: Repression, Revision, and the Stakes of 'Reading Psychoanalysis Into' Kenneth Branagh's Hamlet." Early Modern Literary Studies 6.1 (May, 2000): 2.1-24 <URL: http://purl.oclc.org/emls/06-1/lehmhaml.htm>. Shakespeare, William. The Tragedy of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark. Massachusetts Institute of Technology. 1995. http://www.chemicool.com/Shakespeare/hamlet/full.html No line nos. Smith, Rebecca. â€Å"Gertrude: Scheming Adulteress or Loving Mother?† Readings on Hamlet. Ed. Don Nardo. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 1999. Rpt. of â€Å"Hamlet†: A User’s Guide. New York: Limelight Editions, 1996.

LAW 421 Theory to Practice Essay

Theory to Practice Questions 1.At one point, if ever, did the parties have a contract? The parties had a contract when they agreed on the key terms of the distribution contract. The first agreement was a 90-day negotiation agreement and the second was an oral distribution agreement in a meeting prior to the end of the 90-day negotiation. The oral agreement was followed by an e-mail sent to Chou in which the terms of the agreement were reiterated by the manager of BTT. The manager of BTT showed objective intent to contract. In addition, â€Å"faxes, e-mails, letters, memos, and receipts help establish [a] handshake deal† (Hartline, 2007, para. 3). In other words, when BTT sent the email stating all the key terms orally discussed between the parties were agreed upon, both parties showed intent to contract, therefore the agreement of key terms should be considered under contract. 2.What facts may weigh in favor of or against Chou in terms of the parties’ objective intent to contract? Favor: †¢Chou received payment from BTT, leading Chou to believe BTT had intent to come to agreement. †¢The meeting ended with an oral agreement. †¢There is proof of the oral agreement via the BTT e-mail. †¢The e-mail may be considered a rough draft of the contract. †¢The manager sent the e-mail including all of the key terms the parties agreed upon. †¢Even though a month had passed, BTT still requested a copy of the distribution agreement draft. †¢The amount of time spent on the contract and in contact with both parties shows intent to contract. Against: †¢No signatures from either party to bind the contract. †¢The 90-day negotiation deadline passed with only a written agreement, even though the negotiation agreement stated only a written contract was valid. †¢The contract wasn’t drafted until BTT requested a copy a month later. †¢The e-mail did not use the words â€Å"contract†. 3.Does the fact that the parties were communicating by e-mail have any impact on your analysis in Questions 1 and 2 above? The fact that the parties were communicating via e-mail did not impact the analysis of  questions 1 and 2. E-mail is a viable and effective form of communication in today’s world, especially in business. E-mails can be saved and used as evidence in many court cases. According to the mailbox rule, the e-mail was sent prior to the 90 days and was considered accepted when it was sent (Melvin, 2011). 4.What role does the statute of frauds play in this contract? The statute of frauds applies to the sale of goods over $500; sales over that amount need to be in writing (Melvin, 2011). The provisions of the statute of frauds are satisfied if the writing contains several items, including quantity, signature, and clear, concise language (Melvin, 2011). The textbook states that key terms were discussed and agreed upon in the e-mail, however I am not sure if that included quantity. However, BTT provided an electronic signature in the e-mail and the language in the e-mail could be interpreted by a reasonable person as intent to form a contract. Therefore, the e-mail pretty much satisfies the statute of frauds conditions. 5.Could BTT avoid the contract under the doctrine of mistake? Explain. Would either party have any other defenses that would allow the contract to be avoided? I don’t think BTT can void the contract under the doctrine of mistake. A contract is void under the doctrine of mistakes because of misunderstanding in the parties involved such as unilateral mistakes and mutual mistakes. Nothing in the text indicates BTT made a mistake; their reason for not fulfilling contract was a change in management. Chou made the mistake of thinking the e-mail was a draft of the contract, however the fact that BTT requested a copy of the draft a month later gave Chou the impression the company still wanted to conduct business. 6.Assuming, arguendo, that this e-mail does constitute an agreement, what consideration supports this agreement? In order for a contract to be binding, it must be supported by agreement and consideration. The promise (Chou) was willing to give up something of value (his game) and the promisor’s (BTT) promise was part of a bargain for exchange (the key terms in the agreement, specifically price and time frames). BTT led Chou to believe that they were under contract because of their mutual agreement and consideration. References Hartline, K. (2007, September). Oral contracts: Do they carry any weight?. Legal Zoom. Retrieved from http://www.legalzoom.com/business-law/contract-law/oral-contracts-do-they-carry Melvin, S.P., (2011). The legal environment of business: A managerial approach: Theory to practice. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill/Irwin. Retrieved from: The University of Phoenix eBook Collection database

The Death Of Death - Original Writing - 772 Words

It all started the way any story starts, there is a child born. This child tho isn’t what you’d call normal. He was able to take life away. You see, before now life stayed, there was no death, and pain wasn’t very common. At the young age of five he found out exactly what he could do. You see, he went to give his own mother a hug, but she fell down at his feet. She didn’t get up, didn’t move, and just lied there.No one had ever seen anything like this ever before so they burried his mom in the ground hoping to contain whatever had happened, becuse of that we now have funerals now. Deaths life was not easy because eventually he felt himself hurting if he did not take lives. He wouldn’t die, but the pain he felt was worse than being eaten†¦show more content†¦Some cultures saw him as a god, others saw a monster. Either way he didn’t find joy around mortals because eventually they all faded away. The tool he had made would not a ny living creature live forever. Eventually he just went out into the sea. so , not by boat or anything like that, he traveled by walking under the deep blue pools or liquid that seemed so small to him. Eventually he found a cave in the middle of nowhere and made his living just drawing in others life. Eventually after a few centuries he began to want company. Because of his yearning for another he thought about a child he had met on an island when going to his current living area. He was only but twenty when death met him. And yes, that is a child in death s eyes. The child asked death much about what happened after he died. Death could not truthfully answer for he did not know. All he did take lives, after that he had no idea what happened to the whatever was left without life. So he helped the boy try to find out what was left after death. He stayed with the child until he had reached the age of one hundred and twelve. one hundred and fifteen days after he became one hundred an d twelve death told him his time was up. So the child accepted it and told death â€Å"When i die, maybe you will finally be able to see what is left after death.† and smiled. That boy was one of his few friends, but he killed him, because that s what he does. And he did not even find out then if anything was left after life was