I personally think that in Shakespeare's plays any given character can be argued as to wether they are a bad or good character. The characters are not gone into to much detail because it is all dialogue. Any character can be argued to be evil or good, even the insignificant characters.
any thoughts?
It all depends on your perspective. If we were to judge based on the number of people killed, like Mr. Pierce had mentioned, the 'bad' character would be Hamlet. However, if you base it on the reason behind the murder(s), the 'bad' person would be Claudius because he killed to gain the title of king.
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand, I'm going to have to disagree with you on the point of the dialogue not providing sufficient information and details. In my opinion, dialogue tells the readers a lot about the characters and their personalities. It may be harder to interpret compared to a novel that directly tells you who the characters are, and the meaning behind all of the characters' thoughts and words but if anything, dialogue has more to offer. It allows the readers to interpret the meaning and better understand the emotions and feelings of the characters in the play because they are speaking in their own point of view throughout. In a way, it makes the story more realistic and easy to connect with because you can see all of the scenes playing out, one by one.
I hope that made sense, haha. Break time's over, back to studying bio~ :)
i did not mean to say that the dialogue did not proveide enough information. i was just meaning that it leave's many things about the character left to the interpretation of the reader :).
ReplyDeleteand lol very nice :p