Charles Forker argues that Marcus Andronicus, upon discovering the mutilated, raped, and maimed Lavinia, "erects a barrier of fanciful language between himself and the object of his contemplation." It's an interesting question: Is Marcus creating an elaborate metaphor comparing Lavinia to a "cut and pruned" tree in order to escape the horrible reality of her condition, or is he addressing a horrible situation directly in using typical Shakespearean dialogue? Comparing the scene from Titus Andronicus to similar scenes from King Lear and Hamlet, one can only conclude that this elaborate style of speech is uniquely typical of Shakespeare and does not serve to distract from the action on stage. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get the original essay In King Lear, Lear finds himself betrayed by his daughters Regan and Goneril, and captured by his enemies. Sent to prison with his daughter Cordelia, he has no reason to be anything other than painfully depressed about the bleak future that awaits him in the dungeons, but he launches into a beautiful and completely inappropriate ode to his daughter: No , no, no, no. ! Come, let us go to prison: We two alone will sing like birds in the cage: When you ask me to bless, I will kneel and ask your forgiveness: thus we will live, pray, sing and tell the old man. tales, and laughing at golden butterflies, and hearing poor rascals talk of court news; and we will talk with them too: who loses and who wins; who is inside, who is outside; — and assume the mystery of things, as if we were God's spies; and we will exhaust, in a walled prison, packs and sects of great ones who ebb and flow by the moon. (24:7-19) Note that despite a gentle metaphor comparing him and his daughter Goneril to a pair of songbirds locked in a cage, Lear addresses the reality of the situation: they are locked in prison for probably the stay. of their lives. The “fancy language” cited by Forker can also be found here, but it does not detract from the meaning of the speech. On a purely literary level, Shakespeare does his work a service by offering an alternative point of view to the expected "woe is me" philosophy, and by flourishing it with a beautiful metaphor which contrasts perfectly with the scene and makes piece a joy for the reader. Hamlet, Hamlet has the opportunity to offer a mournful lament when he discovers that his love, Ophelia, is dead. He is no match for Lear and Marcus when he cries: Who is there whose sorrow carries such emphasis, whose sentence of sorrow calls to mind the wandering stars and makes them stand as marvelously hearers? injured? It is I, Hamlet the Dane (5:1:250-255). The reason Hamlet does not offer a more elaborate speech may be due to the context. At this point in the play, Hamlet is trying to make everyone believe that he is actually mad, so a long, lucid speech to his deceased love may have betrayed him. After all, it is only a few lines later that Hamlet tells Laertes that he is going to “eat a crocodile” (5:1:273). A better example of mourning in Hamlet is found early in the play, when Hamlet first discovers the truth about the deaths of his father, his murderous uncle, and his incestuous mother: O all of you, army of heaven! O earth! What else? And do I have to couple the hell? O fi, hold on, hold on, my heart, And you, my tendons, do not age instantly, But support me with stiffness. Remember you! Yes, poor ghost, while memory holds a seat in this distracted globe. Remember you! Yes, from the table of my memory I will erase all trivial and affectionate records, all saws from the books,, 1987.