Story

Babett's story is similar to Happy Endings in its fragmented structure, the main blocks of story have definite divisions, and the fact that it's the story itself that matters, not the ending. As Babette says, "This is not a story about your disappointment at my silence. The theme of this story is my pain and my attempts to end it.", Jack's disappointment (the end result of her story) is, at least in her mind, unimportant when compared to the details in her story. In Happy Endings, the end of all the story possibilities is always the same, so the actual content of the story is what is of importance.

Atwood is especially interested a "how and why", or the relevant (but not always) details of a story, the events leading up to the story, the small details, the motives of the people in it, the possibly random or 'lucky' occurrences that facilitate the plot and of course the turning point(s) (if applicable). Babette is interested in the details of her story, not Jack's feelings that resulted from it, or her "condition" that led her to seek the medical trial.

Pavlov's Cookies

or, Girl Scouts and behavioral conditioning

Well, I suppose that it could be said that having Girl Scouts sell cookies outside of Safeways and such conditions them towards a certain role in the future, however I'm not entirely sure what it is. I can only speculate, and my thoughts are as follows:

The task of selling cookies is much like a sales person's job (with the exception that it's much easier to get away from a Girl Scout than a Salesman). They just stand there and ask people if they want to buy cookies, I haven't seen any of them look happy or welcoming or even like they remotely want to sell cookies.
Other than that, I can't really see how this is conditioning girls to a certain social role or anything like that.

Disorder

Billy Collins' poem "Forgetfulness" is filled with a celebration of disorder as art, bringing to light our fear of forgetting all that we know, to the point of forgetting ourselves, whether it be from old age of simply the long journey of life. The order that this serves as a counterpoint to is learning and knowledge. It names various things that you can learn and it turn forget during your life, starting with novels and moving to things learned in school to finally your name and identity yourself, all lost to the mythological river Lethe, the river of forgetfulness. With it this forgetfulness brings new curiosity, as old facts are re-learned and a regretful yearning for emotional memories and nostalgia. A small and humorous detail of the poem describes a memory as "not even lurking in some obscure corner of your spleen." Memories are stored in your brain, not your spleen, but it is possible to forget that as well, following the path of degeneration and disorder brought on by the information lost from the mind forever.

Hyperrealism

How does hyperreality effect the American perception of love and relationships?

The concept of hyperreality pervades many aspects of our lives, especially as Americans in a culture obsessed with seeing the impossible ideal and superimposing it over reality. We don't like seeing things in a light that hasn't been presented to us through some media form, whether that light is pleasant or not.
Our perception of love and relationships in general have been, as it could be said from certain perspectives, tainted by the hyperreal images given to us in various media formats. The basic movie romance is a prime example of this, where the main character, hero/heroine, etc. meets his or her love interest, has adventures, comical, epic or otherwise, or a journey of some kind and they're all happy in the end. This is not what always happens, it doesn't always work out in the middle, it doesn't always work out at the end, and it doesn't event begin in some cases. People make mistakes, bad choices, misfortunes occur and "falling in love" could really just be desperation. Sometimes this ideal does happen, and while nice, it also reinforces the hyperreal images we hold. This can, unfortunately, lead those inclined to believe that hyperreality is more real than it is to become disenfranchised with the real and reject it in favor of this enhanced and idealized notion. This propagates the cycle as they create a demand for more fantastic and impossible hyperreal perceptions to be fed to them, bringing about a spiral. Whether this spiral is upward or downwards depends on your perspective, as a cycle of hyperreal perceptions in society as a whole could be seen to lead to an attempt to change attitude and the course of action to reflect these fabricated ideals and thus the hyperreal becomes the real. The problem with this is that it requires mass acquiescence and a common perception that may not be beneficial in the long run or even achievable if it is. Also, from a Christian perspective, the ideals of man will more often than not be counter to the will of God. This of course is an argument for the downward spiral of the hyperreal perception cycle.
Another, more subtle yet more prolific form of the hyperreal tainting the perception of the real is "Reality Television", especially those shows dealing with relationships. When a couple is 'matched up' through the show's process, it is glossed over, even scripted (they're lying when they say it's not) to make it seem better than it really is. This has the same effect as the previously mentioned example in creating a cycle of desire for the hyperreal image as people cannot deal with the reality that it does not match.


(I realize that this is not MLA format. I object to the limitations of MLA formatting and the cookie-cutter, mass produced, unimaginative writing it produces. It is a tool for young essayists who have trouble organizing their thoughts in a logical and meaningful fashion, not a universal cure-all format for every piece of academic writing. I'll get off my soapbox for now, but this is not the last I have to say on the subject.)

Horatio's Words

I think this line is spoken with a mixed tone. Although Horatio knows that Hamlet has just sent two of his friends to their deaths, he has foiled the king's plot to kill him in England. Horatio probably does not approve of Hamlet's method of saving himself, however, after Hamlet's treatment of them, Ros and Guil don't really seem to be his friends. He does not show remorse at their death, although since he is arguable mad, we cannot really understand him fully, and it appears to me that he just threw them away. As was said in class, they are "sponges", just tools of the king, and so if it foils Claudius's plans, so much the better for it.

You've got questions? I *may* have an answer...

This question was posted by Cory (http://coryscshamlet.blogspot.com/)

#1- What is king Claudius's true reason for wanting Hamlet to leave.... is it about his maddness or about the murder?

My reply? yes.
I think that Claudius is sending Hamlet to England for both reasons, first of all, because he is becoming a royal pain in the tailbone with his "oh look at me, I've gone completely balmy" routine, and second of all, because he is, or at least seems to be, growing very close to revealing that Claudius killed Hamlet's father and now occupies it illegitimately. He thinks that sending Hamlet off to England will distract him long enough to make him forget about his madness and focus on something more productive. He also would need time to plan a way to keep Hamlet's suspicions from becoming known, especially after the debacle with the modified play. The trip to England would give Claudius a chance to plot a scheme of his own to protect his royal status without being too obvious.

Does Claudius think that Hamlet is feinging madness?

If Hamlet is indeed simply acting in a manner to make those around him believe he is mad, does the king hold any suspicions of this? Is Hamlet's act so well orchestrated that he has hoodwinked the sly old fox?

From my personal observations, it seems to me that Claudius is taken in by Hamlet's actions, or else he is as good an actor as the prince. In act 2.2 when Polonius tells him that he knows the cause of Hamlet's madness he says, " Oh, speak of that! That I do long to hear.", and refuses to let the issue drop until Polonius has fully explained it. He devotes a scant few lines to the international affairs of his country, dismisses the ambassadors and hurries back to the subject of Hamlet. There is one point though, where he sounds like he is saying that Hamlet is simply acting. In scene 3.1 he says to Polonius, "...Get from him why he puts on this confusion... with turbulent and dangerous lunacy?". It may be a misenterpreted cojecture on my part to say this, but it could be seen as a hint that he does not believe that Hamlet has truly lost his marbles.