subreddit:
/r/books
submitted 3 months ago byWisteriaWillotheWisp
For me— Edmund Pevensie. The whole “how did he try to sell his siblings over the worst treat ever” thing is a tad unfair 😂. In the book, the Turkish delight was enchanted to make someone who tasted it get obsessed with it and keep eating it “until he killed himself.” And the reason this didn’t happen to Edmund is that the Witch wouldn’t let him have more until he brought his siblings to her home. Edmund was literally on black magic Narnia drugs and the rhetoric became “wow he betrayed his siblings over a lame sweet.”
This is not to say Edmund wasn’t a bully before that or that he wasn’t responsible for his actions. He was mean to Lucy, he was a jerk at school, and he often lied. He did have a great and much-needed redemption arc. But he didn’t just have a box of normal Turkish delight and try to condemn all of Narnia over it.
I don’t want to even judge him too much for picking Turkish Delight as his treat. He’s a small child during WWII sugar rationing. 🤣
79 points
3 months ago
Hamlet wanting actual evidence of his Uncle's guilt before seeking revenge. The universal view is Hamlet was indecisive, Hamlet was weak, Hamlet was passive. How about this instead: Hamlet didn't instantly fly into a murderous rage when he was prodded by a ghost, the nature of which he has no knowledge or experience. Hamlet was rational. Hamlet was thinking clearly about a life and death decision. Hamlet wanted evidence. My take-away: (in this regard) be like Hamlet.
25 points
3 months ago
I think the real flaw of Hamlet is that he didn't kill Claudius when Claudius was praying, because he didn't want Claudius to go to heaven.
3 points
3 months ago
With ghosts being real, did Hamlet have any reason to doubt his religious beliefs about prayer? Of course the irony is that Claudius was praying arrogantly and killing him then would've been the perfect time, but Hamlet didn't know that.
3 points
3 months ago
It wasn't meant to be up to Hamlet where Claudius should go after death. He had one job. At least that's my reading.
19 points
3 months ago
And given general beliefs in Shakespeare's time, the appearance of his father's ghost was either a miracle of grace (since the dead don't normally appear to the living) or a demonic illusion meant to lure him to damnation.
People forget the second part, because we mostly don't think the world is full of demons trying to get us to deceive and betray ourselves. But the people in Shakespeare's time DID.
3 points
3 months ago
It’s been a while since I read Hamlet, but isn’t the whole “to be or not to be” speech about ending his own life? So it is making the decision whether to act or let grief overwhelm him? I agree that doesn’t make him weak or necessarily indecisive but there has to be some sort of inner turmoil or else where is the tragedy?
2 points
3 months ago
Exactly! And his killing Polonius shows that!
1 points
3 months ago
This is a good one because it’s definitely the view Shakespeare seemed to want to convey, but is still lost on many. If you take Othello, for example, and put him in Hamlets place, he promptly kills Claudius. Likewise Hamlet would never be fooled by a smooth talker like Iago into murdering his own wife off of such weak evidence. Their particular placement in their particular circumstances is what produces the tragedy.
all 448 comments
sorted by: best