Evidence of Margaret Avison’s “The Swimmer’s Moment” in William Shakespeare’s “Hamlet”: Hamlet’s Swimmer’s Moment

Hamlet, the main character of William Shakespeare’s play of the same name, struggles prodigiously throughout the show with a dilemma. “The Swimmer’s Moment” as characterized by Margaret Avison greatly parallels this very quandary. Hamlet’s “swimmer’s moment” is his need to decide what to do about his father’s death: Hamlet can seek revenge and lose his own life in the process, or he can choose inaction and watch his life crumble. In essence, Hamlet’s dilemma is his “swimmer’s moment.”

Avison’s “The Swimmer’s Moment” both creates and defines the term “swimmer’s moment” as the instant at which one is about to face inevitable destruction, or instead choose to opt for ignorance. At this moment, one must choose either to “turn and turn” (Avison 9) around the edge of the whirlpool or to challenge “The deadly rapids” (Avison 7) and “penetrate their secret” (Avison 18). Ultimately, the “swimmer’s moment” is imperfect; neither outcome of the choice can yield a distinguishably desirable result. Given the choice of entering “the whirlpool,” (Avison 4) or choosing to ignore “the black pit” (Avison 6) it is impossible to really say whether “one or two have won” (Avison 20). Primarily this is because, even upon entering the whirlpool one will inevitably be “whirled into the ominous centre” (Avison 13); the whirlpool leads to death, but it also allows the swimmer to achieve te majestic secret that lies in the “eternal boon of privacy” (Avison 15). To conclude, the “swimmer’s moment” is the moment that one must choose to enter the whirlpool or to ignore the rapids, and lie forever on the precipice of achieving what dwells inside of what one has chosen to disregard.

Hamlet’s dilemma in “Hamlet” is that he must decide what to do, and ultimately how to execute it. The character’s circumstance is illustrated in his fourth soliloquy:

How stand I then,

That have a father kill'd, a mother stain'd,

Excitements of my reason and my blood,

And let all sleep? (IV.iv.56-59).

Principally, Hamlet must determine if he should avenge his father’s death or instead ignore his feelings toward the supposed murder of King Hamlet and move on like the rest of Denmark has done. However, this is not as simple as it appears; Hamlet is notorious for his over thinking of almost everything, “To be, or not to be, that is the question” (III.i.56). Consequently, Hamlet has spent months analyzing the question of whether he should seek revenge, or listen to his morals. If Hamlet chooses to avenge the death of King Hamlet he has two basic options: murder, or prove King Claudius’s guilt. Whereas, to ignore his feelings towards the ultimate destruction of his beloved family simply requires him to forget the testimony the Ghost gave of the “Murder most foul” (I.v.27) committed by “ that incestuous, that adulterate beast” (I.v.42). However, Hamlet encounters a problem with the ghosts testimony:

The spirit that I have seen

May be the devil: and the devil hath power

To assume a pleasing shape; yea, and perhaps

Out of my weakness and my melancholy,

As he is very potent with such spirits,

Abuses me to damn me (II.ii.600-605).

This possibility adds complexity to Hamlet’s dilemma as he is now presented with an alternative hypotheses in which he must now determine whether it would be right, let alone morally right , to in fact kill King Claudius, the alleged murdered of Hamlet’s father. Therefore, Hamlet’s dilemma of deciding whether to kill Claudius, or to let him live has become complicated as factors such as the Ghost and Hamlet’s tendency to overanalyze have been presented.

Furthermore, Hamlet’s dilemma is his “swimmer’s moment.” This moment for Hamlet is his need to decide to seek revenge on Claudius, and thus plunge into the whirlpool, or to ignore his mourning and become one of the “bland-blank faces” (Avison 9).To begin with, Hamlet is dearly afraid of the ramifications of entering the whirlpool. This is evident clearly throughout the play, “Conscience does make cowards of us all” (III.i.83). This forces him to make a choice that is very much like that of a swimmer. Just like a swimmer, if Hamlet does choose to enter “the whirlpool, then” (Avison 4) he will be facing something that he is truly fearful of in hope of possibly exchanging this fear for some enlightenment, whether it is to discover “The silver reaches of the estuary” (Avison 21) or to achieve the justice and the closure that will evidently come with the death of King Claudius. In conclusion, the dilemma that Hamlet faces seems to model the qualifications of a “swimmer’s moment” as has been presented by Margaret Avison.

Also, just as in “The Swimmer’s Moment” Hamlet must make a choice that will yield negative results regardless of his solution. Firstly, Confucius once stated that “Before you embark on a journey of revenge, dig two graves” this seems to be very true to Hamlet’s situation. In order for Hamlet to carry out his plan to murder Claudius he must inevitably confront the possibility that he could fatally fail in the act, or he could succeed in his revenge but in the end suffer from his very own brand of justice, in the hands of another. Simply stated, Hamlet must risk his own life in his pursuit to end the life of King Claudius. Secondly, if Hamlet successfully ignores his desire to avenge the death of his father he will remain “forever on the rim of suction” (Avison 10). As both the play and Hamlet’s inaction move further on in time Hamlet’s life turns to shambles. As a result of Hamlet’s tardiness in executing a plan, he has started to lose his friends; Ophelia has drowned, “Too much of water hast thou, poor Ophelia” (V.vii.186), along with Rosencratz and Guildenstern being killed, and Hamlet has lost his Mother, Gertrude, to King Claudius. It is clear that as the story goes on, and Hamlet further delays his decision, dire consequences continue to be realized. Thereupon, Hamlet’s decision parallels “The Swimmer’s Moment” in its imperfectness and inability to produce a rewarding result.

Thus, Hamlet’s dilemma is one in which exemplifies a “swimmer’s moment” as both offer a decision that is apparently impossibly hard to answer, and completely undesirable to the one who must answer it. Both “Hamlet” and “The Swimmer’s Moment” feature a choice that is between self destruction and ignorance; between achievement and an artificial life excluding what could be. For Hamlet to ignore the whirlpool he will not only lose a part of his life, his friends and family, he will also remain nescient. However, If Hamlet does choose to enter the “gaping vertical” (Avison 14) he will fulfill his natural desire to avenge his father, but he will face his inevitable defeat. Accordingly, Hamlet’s “moment at the whirlpool comes” (Avison 2) not to create action, but to create drama. Shakespeare has indefinitely used this moment as a means to create one of his most well known and revered works of his great canon of drama.

Works Cited

Avison, Margaret. “The Swimmer’s Moment.” Winter Sun. Toronto: University of Toront Press, 1962. pp.36.

Shakespeare, William. “Hamlet.” Mississauga: Canadian School Book Exchange, 1996.

Print.

Why must Hamlet die?

After all of the wonderful presentations on the various interpretations of Hamlet, I must say that I was most moved by G. Wilson Knight ideas about the Shakespearean play. Knight managed to come up with some very meaningful, and relevant renderings of Hamlet that I feel do a great job of answering many of the lingering questions one may have after studying the play.

I agree very much so with Knight in that the play's theme is death, and that the character Hamlet is very much surrounded by the numerous examples of human kind's mortality. Shakespeare also ties in themes of good and evil that make the play equally balanced in terms of thematic differentiations.

In terms of both G. Wilson Knight's interpretation, to which I also sceptically agree, Hamlet must die because he has "soul-sickness." This "soul-sickness" comes from the fact that he is no longer mentally healthy, he has lost his father to murder and his mother to incest, and cannot seem to function properly. This dysfunction creates a Hamlet that is "inhuman" and incapable of thinking much more than of death, it also fills him with meaninglessness so much so that he has really already died. The real Hamlet, the one that we never meet, is no longer there; the Hamlet that the play knows is one that is infected and confused. Hamlet's infection soon comes to effect the whole play and all of its characters, eventually to the point that everyone dies. Thus Hamlet must die because he can no longer live; he cannot live because his life has been ruined, and he has ruined every other person's lives. Hamlet's disease is why he must die, and it is why he is already dead.

What's Hamlet to you?

Hamlet represents to me the indecencies and the falsities that are in our everyday lives. The play is centred around the theme of death, and constantly hints at the morbid details of the Danish kingdom. Furthermore, Shakespeare includes incestuous events, psychosis, and murder. Despite all this, Hamlet is able to illustrate that life can and is worth living, and that one must maintain hope throughout.

Hamlet is a hero, but an imperfect one at that. He lives in a dangerously dysfunctional world, and he himself seems to be quite dysfunctional. The play focuses on, and is quite famous for Hamlet’s inability to decide, “To be, or not to be”, and on his tendency to over think everything that happens around him, “The undiscovered country from whose bourn No traveller returns, puzzles the will.” The fact that even though Hamlet may be a tragic hero does not seem to effect the fact that Hamlet is the protagonist, and is reasonably able to convince the audience that though life is dreary, or torturous, it is still very much worth living.

"A Girl's Story" - David Arnason

“A Girl’s Story” by David Arnason is a classic example of a short piece of fiction that can be examined under the postmodern microscope. This school of literary criticism is generally defined as a rebellion against the rules of modernism. A postmodern author will tend to ignore the traditional constraints of structure, and form; in place using the power of imagination to formulate a text. Furthermore, postmodernism aptly blends the cultures and classes to create a barrier-free story that anyone can enjoy, and understand. This tendency is perhaps the most important aspect of postmodernism because it allows an author to create a message that most anyone can appreciate.

Arnason uses postmodernism as a vehicle to mock and stereotype the multiple opposing schools of criticism. Firstly, feminism is parodied throughout the text, most notably in the tenth paragraph: “I’m going to have trouble with the feminists about this story. . . . The feminists are going to say that I’m perpetuating stereotypes, that by giving the impression the girl is full of hidden passion I’m encouraging rapists” (Echoes 12, 229). Clearly, Arnason has criticized the feminist theory by explicitly stating that the movement over analyses a phrase’s meaning, and thus places an artificial connotation upon an otherwise satisfactory grouping of vowels. Also, during the reading of “A Girl’s Story” one can clearly pick out the “digs” against the reader response movement. This is evident in the sentence “I could do a lot more of that, but you wouldn’t like it” (228), in this case Arnason has satirized what the stereotypical reader will think of a part of the story. Thus, he makes a bold statement predicting what a reader will like or dislike in a story. Despite Arnason’s alleged hostility towards the literary theories of feminism and reader response, it would be quite reasonable to suggest that this bullying was all in good fun, and nothing more than a ploy to attract readers.

Additionally, the irony of the title “A Girl’s Story” adds to the comic tone of the story. While this title intuitively refers to a story of a female protagonist written by a female author it is quite obvious that this is far from true. Not only is the author a male, he seems to stereotype what a female would write and read in such a story. By doing so he creates almost an opposing environment to that expected of “a girl’s story.” While this is far from what would be traditionally appealing, perplexedly this surprise offers instead a story that ever more interesting and readable. This is mostly based on the fact that when a reader is made uncomfortable by reading something that is so far from the norm it actually makes a piece more alluring. This characteristic also quite fittingly is a facet of postmodernism. To conclude, the use of irony in this story not only fits that of the postmodern movement, it also counter-intuitively excites the reader.

In closing, Arnason’s use of parody and irony help create a postmodern short fictional prose that is not only enjoyable to read, but also somehow complex.

“Things That Fly” - Douglas Coupland

The story’s multiple references to “things that fly” create a philosophical discussion based on the symbolism of flight. Explain how Coupland has managed to parallel the likes of “Calvin and Hobbes” or K’naan, the Dusty Foot Philosopher, by manipulating tone, structure, symbolism, and diction.

Douglas Coupland employs the tools of postmodernism to create a story that is both insightful and engaging. Through the use of structure, tone, symbolism, diction, and many more tools Coupland has achieved a postmodern opus.

By definition, postmodernism is untraditional, it is revolutionary in many cases, and it is rebellious. Postmodernism is a departure from modernism, one in which an author is able to use anarchic construction and casual tone to convey a story or message. This literary school of criticism often seems to be found confusing, and uncomfortable but with a little analysis one can often find a little sense in a story like “Things That Fly.”

Throughout this short story, Coupland continually refers to birds, and Superman; put more simply, there is a recurring theme of “things that fly” throughout the story. Upon investigation, these references are symbols which function as allusions to the story’s meaning. When the narrator asks God to “just make me a bird – that’s all I ever wanted – a white graceful bird free of shame and taint and fear of loneliness” (Imprints, 147) he is illustrating that birds, or anything else that flies, are truly free; they “are a miracle because they prove to us there is a finer, simpler state of being which we may strive to attain” (145). The symbolism goes so far as to imply that perhaps humans have devolved, as opposed to evolved, from animals. That humans have become creatures that are inferior to those of the skies. Perhaps when we look to heaven, to God, we are really looking to the birds, and “things that fly,” and that is what we strive to become. That is why humans have “always liked the idea of Superman” (146) because he is the “one person in the world who is able to fly” (146). We idolize Superman because he has achieved this state of being that is devoid of arbitrary possessions and humanly worries. Superman is free.

This freedom is in particular what the narrator seeks because he seems to have gone through something that has damaged his psyche: “My brains felt overheated. So much has happened in my life recently” (144). The narrator could be hurt for countless reasons, but what seems to fit the best is that he has been divorced. Although this is never stated, or even implied, one can clearly tell the narrator has been emotionally destroyed.

The tendency for a postmodernist to ignore the barriers of “high” and “low” classes and to blend them as one can be clearly seen in the comic “Calvin and Hobbes.” The linkage of philosophy and cartoons is an obvious facet of postmodernism because it is able to ignore class barriers. This is not only true for comics though. K’naan is a hip-hop artist known for philosophizing and intellectual lyrical content. He calls himself the Dusty Foot Philosopher because he feels that although he grew up impoverished and without an education, in Somalia no less, he is still able to engage in profound discussions and maintain an understanding of concepts generally regarded as solely for the “high” class. This “dusty foot philosophizing” also seems to be evident in Coupland’s story. Coupland writes in an extremely informal tone while still alluding to exceptionally complex matters. In a sense, “Things That Fly” is an extension of a “Calvin and Hobbes” comic because it has portrayed a subject that was previously reserved for a well-read “higher” class.

The line drawings and casual diction contributes to both a conversational tone as well as a classic example of the postmodern school. Coupland’s diction is displayed in the opening paragraph when he writes “having just woken up from a deep deep sleep on a couch shared with pizza boxes and crushed plastic cherry yogurt containers” (143). This relaxed diction is a clear aspect of postmodernism in the sense that it creates a deconstructive story. Instead of explaining his message in some sort of academic slang, the author chooses to use a tone that is more often found in a children’s story. Thus, Coupland creates a story that is far from the modernist’s method of structured formality. Additionally, cohesion between paragraphs has clearly been ignored, this anarchic structure, instead of creating chaos, actually entices the reader. Conformity is boring, and Coupland’s rebellious attitude towards structure creates a story that is interesting to read solely because it is different. For example, the first and second paragraph flow like a boat does through ice: “let me describe what happened today” (143), ends the foremost paragraph, followed by “today went like this: I was up at noon; instant coffee” (143). Although there is a connection in themes, the first paragraph could have easily been erased and no one would have known better; this is because the cohesion was so distant that it was completely useless. However, this sense of mayhem helps create a short story that is readable, and one that is able to question society through the imagination.

In closing, “Things That Fly” has embodied the ideals of postmodernism by conveying a message in an unconventional way. The lack of structure, casual diction and tone, as well as symbolism have all contributed to making a work of art out of a children’s story.

"Ode to a Nightingale" by John Keats

Why?

Keats chose to write about an experience with a Nightingale as a means of releasing his sorrows, and also to re-examine his role in nature. Keats’ heightened consciousness has become his art form. By using the poem as a release, he has thus been able to relax and in effect look more intently into the many beauties of nature. Moreover, Woodsworth wrote that “only total absorption in nature could heal thoughts;” it seems to be that Keats has heeded Woodsworth’s advice by writing this piece. Additionally, by using an ode, Keats was able to elevate the entrancement of his verse. Odes traditionally have a meditative quality, and this attribute clearly had a magnificent effect on the verse, as “Ode to a Nightingale” does seem to draw the reader into a trance.

How?

The Romantic period was focused on representing the “picturesque sublime” in a “total surrender to a visual’s impression,” this was clearly done in “Ode to a Nightingale.” The verse is representative of Romanticism in the sense that it is in itself a study in nature. Just like in Romantic art, where the artist used colour, and not shape, to represent reality, Keats has used diction, metaphor and many other artful devices to construct his reality. By relying on these devices, and not so much on the actual subject, Keats has managed to create something elegant, and divine out of something mundane.

What?

The rhetorical devices used by Keats appear to be the vehicle in allowing Keats to achieve his goals. Through the use of rhetorical questions, “do I wake or sleep,” Keats has allowed both the reader and himself the opportunity to analyze the subject of the canto. Diction also has been able to have this effect. By using phrases such as “charm’d magic casements,” Keats has presented a poem that is stimulating. Thus, when recited the stanzas force the reader to study the words, and their subjects, closely with a keen mind. These two devices have thus been able create an intense scrutiny that forces the reader to both think about the beauties of nature, but also their effects. Secondly, by using metaphors Keats has greatly reflected nature’s elegance in the splendour of his images. Phrases like “the fancy cannot cheat so well as she is fam’d to do, deceiving elf” demonstrate the magnificence of nature and also the brilliance of Keats’ mind. Finally, alliteration has allowed the poem to flow like a spring stream. Keats almost regularly uses phrases like “self-same song” and “amid the alien” to create a poem that flows more than a “still stream” would. This fluidity reflects nature's organic look, where nothing ever looks out of place. To conclude, the use of such devices as alliteration and metaphor, Keats ahs been able to create an ode that is able to parallel the beauties of nature.