Metamorphosis

Society, from the start, has dominated based on a set of invisible and unbreakable rules. It is erroneous to denominate its members as  individuals since they are, in reality, the exact opposite. More properly labeled, its conformers live by the rules never questioning them or even being aware of their existence. Nevertheless, from time to time a rare case of metamorphosis occurs where conformers transform or attempt to transform into individuals. Such is the case of Edna Pontellier from The Awakening and Chief Bromden from One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest who "apprehended instinctively the dual life- that outward existence which conforms, the inward life which questions" to recognize their identity. (36)

Both characters begin their transformation by distinguishing the tension between the outside and their inside. Edna's experience began when "an indescribable oppression, which seemed to generate in some  unfamiliar part of her consciousness, filled her whole being with a vague anguish." (22) Bromden's began when he created the theory of the Combine by sensing the evilness in the machine manipulation. They both had their ways of reacting to this recognition by isolating themselves from the other conformers. Mrs. Pontellier participated the least possible in social gatherings and kept her distance from other people. Chief Bromden put on an invisible cloak by pretending to be a deaf-mute. They both did this as a way to purify their identity by reducing contact with society's rules.

Another common factor in this metamorphosis is finding someone who acts as the incentive to speed up the transformation. Robert is Edna's incentive since he is the one who pulls her away from her societal role of a house wife. Whenever duty called her as time to go because "the sun will be gone in two hours", Robert is there to advice her to "let it go" always reminding her that no one really cares. (79) McMurphy works on the Chief as a model for hope by showing him that acting against society is possible. McMurphy is the person to whom he opens up because he is able to identify him as an individual. These two incentives have both been in contact with the transformation and have even been able to coordinate their outside with their inside. They are mentors to the two other characters who inspire them to let their identity break free.

There is always a situation that pushes the almost-individuals harder towards their conversion. For Edna it was Robert's departure because it took "the brightness, the color, the meaning out of everything" giving her an objective panoramic view of life and off course society. (91) For Bromden it was the unfair meeting they had concerning the TV for the baseball game because he realized the ongoing immorality. Grasping society's flaws made them value themselves as individuals discovering each time more how strong their identity really was and how easily the tension could be eased. 

Identity is the key to happiness because it is the only thing that will give you peace of mind between the outward existence and the inward questioning. Mrs. Pontellier rebelled against her strict role of a house-wife and Bromden freed himself from the ward's torture. Again, it is extremely weird to find this cases but it is still extremely relieving. This is because it assures you that identity can fight society's rules and make you a satisfied individual inside and out. 

Performing Low to High

Around the world Hamlet has been interpreted in different ways depending on its location, cast and director. After listening to the podcast "218: Act V" of The American Life, I realized the importance of the interpretation. The podcast talks about the production of The Missouri State Penitentiary who, based on the intimacy the actors (inmates) have on the material, produced one of the best interpretations ever. The actors, are really criminals who have committed violent crimes and play the roles of men who execute crimes as well. It is this situation that makes the production sincere because its actors identify with their roles while meditating on society and morality.

Performing is an art of expression. The  Missouri State Penitentiary production is a literal representation of this statement. Character in the play are more realistic because of their similarity to the actor. Johnson, one of the Hamlet's interpreters claims to relate with the character's "Idea of wanting to hurt someone." Others like Word who plays Laertes are naturals at playing the bad guy because it is what they have been doing throughout their life in order to impress people. However, perhaps the most striking moment of the play was Evan's confession of Claudius' murder since it was an actual apologetic "speech to g-d." Relating to their characters' situations gave the actors an advantage over any professional in the world. They had, like no other, experience to guide them when performing. This type of advantage is rare, but it is what makes true artists legitimate. 

The process of the play as a whole worked as a therapeutic session for the inmates. It showed "Big Hutch" that he didn't have to always be the "Big Whale." He got the role of Horatio who is ironically a "guppy" who assists and follows others. Even though he got a small part, his performance of a single line was the highlight of the night. Likewise, he learned that small parts in life (like Horatio)  can have a monumental impact. The prisoners ego and power ambition was immediately lowered by the relative humiliation they experience in acting. Edgar stated that participating in the play made him "makes us feel human." Jones' life conception was also altered by "taking him to be insane for a day." This type of insanity can be related to Hamlet's where its sole purpose is self protection from society. Changing perspectives opens the inmates' minds to other alternatives in life. It shows them another way to live and think where manipulation and aggression for power are not included. 

Despite having to deal with different crisis, following the prison's procedures, and  horrible steamy weather, the production was a great success. Not only as an entertainment but as a positive influence to the group members. Its prosperity is displayed in the example of Manuel, an inmate who had been released 2 weeks before the presentation but decided to stay until the end. As tempting as freedom is, the production's influence was more impacting. It proved to the inmates that there is a possibility of moving from the "lowest point in life" to the "highest" with a simple change of perspective. 

Intertextuality among Hamlet and The Love Song of Alfred Prufrock

The Hollowest In the End

Characters tend to add literary value through their personalities. Eliot manages to specifically describe his character J. Alfred Prufrock through an intertextual comparison to Shakespeare’s Hamlet. By calling out on a popular tragic hero, Eliot makes Prufrock easy for the readers to judge and understand him. Both Hamlet and Prufrock share parallel characteristics revolving around incompetence, fear of standing against society, and most importantly indecisiveness.

Both of these tormented characters evaluate themselves as incompetent beings. Prufrock claims to have measured his “life in coffee spoons” (51) hinting his pessimistic thought of a meaningless existence.  In Act IV Hamlet demands more of himself by wanting his thoughts to be bloody. However, he is aware that violent thoughts go against his nature.  Their low self-esteem encourages them to think that they are not capable of fulfilling their desire; this is why they keep on procrastinating. Hamlet accomplishes his murdering deed until the last minute. Nevertheless, worrying on what others think of him stops Prufrock from achieving his goal.

Society’s cynical judgment has made it hard for people to express themselves as individuals.  Prufrock is threatened the most by society’s judgment. Scared of acting out of his regular routine, he questions himself by saying “Do I dare disturb the universe?” (46).  Hamlet has suicidal thoughts by thinking that “to die, -to sleep-no more- and by a sleep” (68) he will end all troubles. This directly implies society’s judgment by labeling him with madness. Although he fears the consequences that murdering Claudius would bring, Hamlet expresses his madness openly with the soul purpose of relieving his grief. Prufrock is more aware of the labels and intends on pushing them away by hiding his personality. 

Indecision is a predominating trait in both Hamlet and Prufrock. It plagues Hamlet from the first ghost apparition. He questions whether it is better “To be, or not to be”(64), dead, or killing Claudius. In Act III, scene 3 he has the chance to kill Claudius but his indecision on whether or not it would send the king to heaven stops him.  Prufrock wonders “Do I dare?” and, “Do I dare?” to act upon his will and assume the consequences. He also inquires “And should I then presume? And how should I begin?” (68-69) being unsure on how to act.  All of this questioning slowly leads them to a worst ending than the consequences by themselves would create.  Hamlet faces a disastrous finale where more lives than intended are avenged. Prufrock’s indecision leads him to regret and eventually an empty death.

In the end, Prufrock proves to be hollower than Hamlet. The man claims that he is “not Prince Hamlet, nor was meant to be” but “an attendant lord.”(111-112) Hamlet at least died as a tragic hero and had people`s attention. Prufrock demonstrates that he underestimates himself more than Hamlet by neglecting an important role in life. He hides his individuality  by ranking himself under others and reassuring his incompetence. Finally, unlike Hamlet who at least killed Claudius, Prufrock does not complete his goal of taking risks and opportunities. This degrades him to a more pathetic level because despite of his weaknesses, he does not attempt to give his life significance at all .