Casting Claudius

            Claudius is the king of Demark, and was only able to gain his royal rank by being sneaky, untrustworthy, and heartless. In a play, his character should present his dishonest character. He should be the character that the audience easily sees as the antagonist who only cares about his own needs. Through the way how the way he dresses, the actor’s looks, and Claudius delivers his lines, the viewers should see his selfishness and his lack of empathy.

 

            Claudius should be a character that is not afraid to display his wealth. A way an audience can easily see his affinity to being powerful and rich, is to have needlessly expensive and flamboyant clothing. As a king, showing wealth and power is expected, however Claudius should even contrast with any other royal figures in the play. I easily envision him in layer after layer of clothing. Claudius should be wrapped in silks and furs and wear unnecessary amounts of jewelry. I can imagine him with a gold ring around each finger and many gold necklaces around his neck. Of course, Claudius should have a large extravagant crown on his head. I want to cast this character this way in order to show that he only cares about living an over extravagant life. Claudius only thinks about himself as he easily brushes off his brother’s recent death introducing his need by saying “yet so far hath discretion with nature that we with wisest sorrow think on him together with remembrance of ourselves.” (Act 1 Scene 2 Line 5) Readers can easily see his lack of sorrow in his brother’s death and his eagerness to fulfill his own needs. He should be dressed looking like that goal is the only thing on his mind.

 

            Claudius is a rather heartless and greedy character, but extremely cunning and fitting to be Hamlet’s nemesis. His character should be portrayed by an actor who has a face that can be taken seriously. The actor should be a respectable in height and weight. The actor should be around six feet tall and should not be over weight. His face should be untrustworthy and confident. I can imagine him with a constant stern face that gives him an unapproachable look. Claudius should have a look to show him as a character that is capable of killing his brother, creating lies, and being Hamlet’s target for the majority of the play. When the audience sees him they should know that he is a character that needs to be taken seriously unlike characters like Polonius. Claudius is a character that should be taken seriously and have an image to back it up, because he is a character that knows how to trick and kill people. He is able to give an argument that Hamlet’s sorrow is an “unmanly grief” and “it shows a will most incorrect to heaven, a heart unfortified, a mind impatient, an understanding simple and unschooled.” (Act 1 Scene 1 Line 94) Although cold-blooded, his argument and thought process is respectable. His ability create a scenario to Hamlet’s death is also proof that he should be taken seriously. Claudius creates a situation where Laertes and Hamlet have a duel with Hamlet’s chance of survival stacked against him due to the use of poison. By conjuring this cunning plan, he is able to avoid responses about Hamlet’s death because “even his mother shall uncharge the practice and call it accident.” (Act 4 Scene 7 Line 67) By his actions and thoughts, readers are able to see his is confident and cunning; however he is equally heartless and untrustworthy. He becomes a character that cannot be taken lightly, which can only made appropriate by having an image that equally demands respect as well as distrust.

           

            Lastly, the way the actor delivers Claudius’s lines will be the most important part for the audience to see the evil king and his ambitions. Claudius needs to deliver his lines in a very confidently and without shame. It is because he is able to deceive people, that he is able to become the new king. At the same time, he has to be proud of how his chain of lies allows him to become king. It is easy to imagine his proud and confident voice when he gave thanks to everyone that “gave” him the idea to marry his sister-in-law for the good of the nation or when he was able to devise a seemingly perfect plan to kill Hamlet. However, at certain points Claudius needs to be out of character, to allow the audience to see he is obviously lying to gain the favor of everyone. When Gertrude breaks the news that Hamlet kills Polonius, Claudius says that his love for him allowed Hamlet’s condition to become worse. Claudius should over dramatize the lines “but so much was our love, we would not understand what was most fit, but, like the owner of a foul disease, to keep it from divulging, let it feed.” (Act 4 Scene 1 Line 19) By overacting, the audience will see how Claudius is pretending to feel guilt for Hamlet’s actions. The audience would be able to hate Claudius’s personality more. Everyone would easily see he is lying in order to seem like a good man.

 

            Claudius is a character that has the greed and apathy of an antagonist and the intelligent mind to challenge Hamlet. It is appropriate that the actor that plays him looks and sounds like a confident, proud, and untrustworthy character. Claudius is a character that needs to be respected and recognized. His clothing and accessories should show his wealth and lack of shame of how he achieved his position. Seeing how he kills his brother only for power, he would probably take advantage of it and use it to have a rich life. The actor himself needs to be confident and worthy of respect. Claudius is the man that Hamlet finds worthy of killing. Claudius’s actor must lack sympathy is his visage and give an uneasy feeling. Lastly, he must deliver each line without any shame of lying and deceiving people. He must be the character that everyone in the audience knows that he is lying. By combining all these elements together, Claudius becomes a very fitting antagonist to Hamlet. The audience will be fully able to see his ability to kill and lie without showing any regret. By having Claudius seems so evil, it allows the viewers to cheer for Hamlet more, and dislike Claudius.

 

Hamlet's Soliloquy

Kenneth Branagh’s Act 3 scene 1 of Hamlet’s soliloquy is the representation of Hamlet’s current state of mind compared to the two different clips of the same scene by Laurence Oliver and Alexander Fodor. The scene makes the viewer question about his sanity but also allows the viewer to see his deep thoughts. Laurence Oliver and Alexander Fodor both portray Hamlet’s deep thoughts. However, Kenneth Branagh’s scene displays Hamlet’s questionable state of mind more than the other two.

               

In Kenneth Branagh’s scene, Hamlet starts out by stating the famous line “To be or not to be, that is the question.” (Act 3 Scene 1 Line 55) The actor delivers the line in a low and hissing tone. The Hamlet in this scene seems maniacal because of his hissing tone as he talks to himself whether it is worth living or not. As he goes further into his thoughts, his voice picks up and becomes quicker and louder. Hamlet seems to become angrier as he delves deeper into his own ideas. His voice picks up as he thinks about the people “who would bear the whips and scorns of time.” (Act 3 Scene 1 Line 69) He then proceeds to become happier as he talks about the undiscovered country in which “no travelers return.” (Act 3 Scene 1 Line 79)  The happiness in his tone as he talks about the afterlife also makes the viewers wonder about his mental state. Hamlet seems happy that he is able to view death in such a way but angry in which how little humans know about death. His combination of happiness and anger in his tone gives him a maniacal image as if he is ready to commit murder at anytime.

           

            The actor’s actions and facial expression also makes the viewer see Hamlet is this insane man. As Hamlet starts his soliloquy he intensely stares into the mirror image of himself and never breaks eye contact. In this scene he is literally talking to himself. The way Hamlet talks to his mirror image of himself as if only Hamlet’s reflection would understand his thoughts. As he stares into the mirror, he must feel proud of himself as if he is saner than anyone else.  He also brings up a tightly gripped fist by his side. The fist shows his anger and passion about humanity and the after life. He points out his fist in front of him like someone who is giving a passionate speech. He then quickly draws out his dagger and points it at his mirror image as he talks about the after life. With his blade, he seems proud and maniacal. He has such a powerful glare to his mirror image while bending his forehead forward with the knife tapping next to his head. He also expresses an evil grin that makes the viewer wonder what he is capable of. Just by his actions alone the viewers can see his mental state.

           

In Laurence Oliver’s clip, Hamlet is on a cliff and over-looking the rapid and aggressive water below him as he says his soliloquy. The clip gives the viewer and uneasy feeling because of the fast pace and chaotic music. The music seems to give a warning like a large storm is coming or something evil is brewing. The actor delivers the first line in a poetic and philosophical way. By listening to the actor the viewer can see that Hamlet is in deep thought and is questioning the afterlife. Hamlet questions if taking “arms against a sea of troubles” (Act 3 scene 1 line 58) is actually worth doing. If the sea in front of him represents his troubles then it seems that Hamlet is more troubled and worried than insane. As the actor shuts his eyes and begins the think with his knife, he is sweating and the music shoots up when he opens his eyes. He seems panicked about his situation and is trying to make the most sense. The scene is surrounded in fog, as if he is searching for an answer for his problems but it is hidden away in the fog. The scene gives the image that Hamlet is confused and is confronting his problems, rather than giving a menacing image of him.

           

In Alexander Fodor’s clip, Hamlet is a more modern person reciting the soliloquy to a voice recorder. In clip, Hamlet is a wide-eye young man that seems to be lost in his thoughts. The clip makes constant flashbacks to his dead father to incorporate his thoughts on death. Hamlet’s voice remains mostly philosophical throughout the clip as he records his thoughts. However he does express some anger when he realizes that “conscience does make cowards of us all.” (Act 3 scene 1 line 82). However, he never expresses any real insanity. It feels like he is just trying to get his thoughts straight. He seems sane as he is not talking to himself, but recording himself. His tone remains calm and thoughtful and his facial expression remains calm. The scene shows his deep thoughts but it does not make the viewers question his sanity.

 

Kenneth Branagh creates the best reenactment of Hamlet soliloquy. Branagh creates a scene where Hamlet expresses his thoughts and insanity simultaneously. While Hamlet makes the viewers think about death and the afterlife by his insightful thoughts, his tone and actions makes the viewers question his sanity. He allows the viewers to believe that he is in control of his insanity which becomes a major part later on in the play. Unlike the other clips, this scene gives the best foreshadowing that his is capable of murder himself. Branagh’s scene perfectly intertwines Hamlet’s philosophical ideas with his questionable state of mind. 

1000 Words Kiefer Image

 

In this image by Anselm Kiefer, Kiefer paints a long pathway far into the horizons. The painting itself looks like it has smudging technique for the sky and the background. The grass on the sides has a similar style. However the tall grass on the left a draw individually and all slant to the right. There are shorter pieces of grass painted in as well. They are placed near the pathway and all stand upwards. Kiefer uses different tones of teal, brown, green, yellow, and black to create a rather mucky grass. They are all dark and withered looking. The left side of the rode however looks murkier than the other side. The grass is taller and unmaintained. There is blacker in the grass as well. The right side looks more like a short grass meadow. It also has three trees sticking up. The trees are white and bare. They have no leaves and have black streaks going down it side. The grassland is mostly barren except for the trees and the road. There are no homes, no people, or buildings. The grassland just stretches to the horizon, uninterrupted. It is actually hard to see where the horizon line is, as the grass seems to just blend in with the sky while the road just continues.

               

The road greatly contrasts with the rest of the painting. The road lays right smack dab in the middle of the image and continues on to the horizon line. Compared to the rest of the painting the road has a much lighter tone. It has different shades of white, yellow, and even light blue. The white really makes it stand out away from the rest of the world which surrounds it in the mucky swamp colors. The random blue streaks, which give a relaxing tone, allow the road to look more inviting than the rest of the surrounding environment. The blue reminds me of flowers or even the blue sky.  The blue makes me think “that is the road I want to take.”  The road seems to continue on and even become bluer. Usually things that are farther away have a cooler tone. I believe that the use of the blue was more than just to give the image depth. It seems the use of blue gives the message that the road leads to a better place, even if it is a very long path.

               

The sky however is rather odd. There seem to be no real defining line between the grass and road to the sky above.  There is a large contrasting line about three fourths up the page. However the road continues regardless of the shift in color. Before the shift in color, the grass is incredibly dark and only contains green, yellow, black and some orange. However, after the line, blue starts to blend in with the mixture.  This creates the image of a sky above the horizon line. The path continues uninterrupted. The path looks almost like it is leading up to heaven. The grass seems to mix in with the sky and the path way seems to never end. The mix of the sky and the ground gives a message to the viewer. It seems to give the message that viewers should try and take a journey and try to find something new on the end of the road. Maybe Kiefer is referring to how life is like journey. Everyone takes a road that leads to somewhere. Maybe this road leads up to the world above.

               

As the road continues to extend upwards, it also has an incline towards the sky. It could be because the hill is rising up. However I believe Kiefer did this on purpose to show the road is reaching up to the heavens. As the pathway continues, everything around it becomes lighter and less murky. It seems more tranquil with the blue used in the background. However, the image becomes less detailed. The individual pieces of grass become mashed together to lines after lines of paint in the background. This allows the image to blend in with the sky. The lack of detail could be a message as well. It could show that viewers have less knowledge about the world far ahead of them compared to what is close to them. If I was on that road, and I could not see the details, I would only follow the road because it looks much more inviting. The land around me is barren, dark, and seems lifeless. The road ahead, although mysterious, contains the blue of the sky. Everything around the road seems bluer and lighter. The road seems to lead a path up and beyond the dark surroundings. It lacks detail and is mysterious, however it gives more of a reason to move on and explore it. To road seems to lead to a better place. It is almost like a road to the sky. It seems like it is a road to heaven. Every line seems to have it strokes towards the center of the page. The lines all flow to the brighter center of the canvas.

               

Lastly the image also contains odd words right in the middle of the image. I believe the words are “Markische Heide.”  It is written in cursive and written right on the center of the path. Märkische Heide is actually a part of Germany. This image could be a painting of a landscape from there. This image could have been from anywhere; however the location was very important for Kiefer. It also leads me to wonder why was the words placed there. Most of the time, background information would be placed outside of the image in its description. However, Kiefer felt it was necessary to include the name inside the image. I also wonder why the name placed right in the middle of the image on the road. The words could have been placed off in the dark grass where it would be harder to see. However, Kiefer placed it right in the middle where it contrasted with the white road and stood out right in the middle of the canvas.

Kenneth Branagh’s interpretation of Hamlet

Kenneth Branagh’s interpretation of “Hamlet” in Act 1 Scene 5 is the scene of Hamlet chasing after his father’s ghost in the dark woods. Branagh’s created a spine-chilling experience by creating a specific atmosphere, having the actors deliver their lines in a specific tone and emotion, and the characterization of the characters in the scene. By setting up the scene in this specific way, the viewers can envision the fear in Hamlet as he lies on the ground witnessing his father’s ghost.

 

Branagh created an eerie scene by manipulating the forest in which Hamlet runs though. Right from the start of the scene, the camera frantically chases Hamlet as he rushes though the forest. The scene also takes place in the night of a foggy night. As Hamlet runs though, the viewers can imagine being in a forest surrounded in darkness and fog. A sea of endless and leafless trees sticks their branches out from the ground and obscures the visibility as well. At the same time the earth shakes, cracks, and release smoke like hell was entering the human world. The camera keeps panning back and forth between the panicking Hamlet, the cracking ground, and the daunting image of a man in armor covered in the mists and the shadows of the night. Everything quickly comes at the viewer creating a frantic feeling while watching the scene. The background music also becomes increasingly louder and quicker adding to the eerie atmosphere. Everything becomes even more uneasy when everything stops. Once act 1 scene 5 begins with Hamlet deciding that he will “go no further” (Shakespeare 1) the background music becomes silent, the quick pandering of the camera slows down, and the explosions and the destruction of the environment stops as well. Once his father finally appears, the background music starts the pick up again with a slow and light sound of an instrument sounding like a flute and the steam flows from the ground again. The darkness fog, and trees makes it terrifying to be in alone, while the destruction, music, the frantic camera gives an uneasiness feeling. Branagh was able to create the uneasy feeling with just the stage setting alone.

 

Branagh also uses the deliverance of the lines to express the frantic tone of the scene. Hamlet is first shown in the scene yelling in a quick and panicked voice. Hamlet expresses his fear when he screams out “I’ll call the Hamlet, King, father, royal Dane. O, answer me!” (Shakespeare Act 1 Scene 4 Line 44). From lines 39 to 57 Hamlet speaks quickly and running out of breath. He has a shaky tone and occasionally raises his voice to express his fear and confusion. Meanwhile, Hamlet’s father’s voice expresses a much different tone. His voice echoes though out the forest giving off the same deep and ghostly voice. The ghost not only delivers a freighting message about hell he also delivers it in his low and hissing tone. He repeats his desire for revenge for the “foul and most unnatural murther,” (Shakespeare 25) and repeats “murther” in his monotone but ghastly voice. The viewers can easily see the fear when Hamlet screams out “O God!” (Shakespeare 24) The use of Hamlet’s fear and the ghastly voice of his father adds to the atmosphere by allowing to feel Hamlet’s fear while listening to his intimidating father.

 

            Lastly, Branagh uses characterization to add to the suspense and atmosphere. Branagh characterizes Hamlet by giving him a rather plain and relatable look. He looks like a very down to earth and human character which allows the viewer to able to relate to him and feel how he feels. The viewers can more easily empathize with Hamlet and immerse themselves in the scene. Meanwhile the characterization of his father allows the reader to easily feel terror. He is constantly casted over by a shadow and hiding from sight. He is encased in a cold and hard armor as if he is ready for way. His face shows no emotion and his eyes stare at Hamlet without even blinking. The ghost’s eyes are even colored ice blue and seem frozen. His lines and the tone he gives with it make him sound tormented and insane.

 

            Branagh is able to create a scene that depicts a very eerie event by the use of various affects in the environment, the tone of the characters, and the characterization of the characters. Each of these techniques allows the viewer to be immersed into the scene and empathize themselves with Hamlet. The uneasiness created by being surrounded in fog and darkness with an intimidating ghost is passed on from Hamlet to the viewers giving the viewers and immersive experience. 

Stephen Colbert and Charles Olsen

                Stephen Colbert uses witty satire and seemingly boundless energy to entertain his viewers. He brings up news and questions in a comedic way to attract people while enlightening them. His questions and responses may seem like jokes, but can insightful questions. In his interview with Elizabeth Alexander, he asked questions about the purpose of poems and its literary technique. Olsen’s response to Colbert’s questions would be based on his belief of what a poem is and its purpose.

           

Colbert quickly starts the comedic questions right when he sits down on the chair. He asks “poems aren’t true, are they?”(Colbert) While comedic and easily misunderstood, the question does have a reason more than just for laughs. Colbert follows his question will concern that a poem he recently read was an accurate description of his life and future. He was concern that if poems are actual facts. He was afraid that the poem was telling him “no matter what he achieves in his life that he is never really going to be great.”(Colbert) Colbert in the end is actually asking, what is the purpose of poems? Is it meant to be factual information or something else? If Olsen was to answer the question he would bring up his belief “a poem is energy transferred from where the poet got it.”(Projective Verse) Olsen believes that influences in a poet’s life allows the poet to the create poems. The poet has thoughts and believes from these influences and tries to express them in a form of a poem. The readers can then see the message in the poems. The poets beliefs feels true to the readers and it allows people to connect with poems. I believe his response would be similar to Alexander’s in the sense that poems is not “strictly factual, but a poem should be, in some way, emotionally true, [and] true to the language that it has.” (Alexander) Olsen would say that poems are not meant to state facts but gives a point of view and allow the reader to see that point of view and think about it. Just as his poems about the change in Gloucester were meant for people to see though his eyes, poems are the energy passed though the poets to the reader.

           

Colbert follows up with his question, “What is an occasional poem?” (Colbert) Alexander responds by responding with the factual answer being that an occasional poem is just for a certain occasion. Colbert then relates her poem to comical theme and goes deeper into how it “only makes sense when you are at Thunder Dome.” (Colbert) Alexander then proceeds to point out that the poem should be used to “mark the occasion but write words that will last afterwards and be useful afterwards in some kind of way.” (Alexander) Olsen would completely agree with Alexander’s idea of the occasional poem. Olsen’s Maximus poems are similar to “Praise Song for the Day.” Olsen’s Maximus poems were created for the occasion of the sudden change in the old city of Gloucester. Old buildings were being taken down and his town was changing from the once humble fishing community. He knew that Gloucester was changing, but the right change for the fishing community. His poems was specifically about Gloucester but is also meant to have a lasting affect. Generations later should listen to Olsen’s message and remember what Gloucester is and make the right choices for it. The poem can also be interpreted for other communities or even other elements of life. Even though poems can be occasional poems, both Alexander and Olsen would agree that words should be used in a way so that the lesson can be still used after the occasion is long past.

           

Colbert’s quick tosses of comedic questions and comments hold deep questions. When he asks if poems were real, he asked about the purpose of the poem and how it should be understood. Both Alexander and Olsen will have similar response in which they both believe that poems not facts but it can have a message that is true to the reader. When he brings up the point about occasional poems, Alexander relays her idea of how a poem’s lesson can still live on similar to the purpose of the creation of the Maximus poems. Although Alexander and Olsen created different poems from different occasions, they both would answer Colbert’s humor in a similar way.

Heart Of Darkness Poems Meta

                “Heart of Darkness” looks deep into the deception of an imagined outcome to the reality. Joseph Conrad created the story with unique phrases and descriptive imagery. Using the wide arranges of Conrad’s diction, powerful and meaningful poetry can be easily created. “Heart of Darkness” showed the harsh reality of life and people. Marlow’s journey became a sorrowful experience that that greatly contrasted the joy the thought he would have felt traveling. People he met also were deceitful and held their own secrets. In the poems “Escape,” “His Plans,” and the “Depth of the Forest,” I tried to capture Marlow’s journey in the poems.

Bound on other conquests.

Leading up the hill,

followed the sea,

down stony hills,

over the empty land.

 

The first four lines were meant to glorify the adventures of traveling. It always seems amazing when some goes off on a “conquest,” go over hills, and following the seas. I list the lines empathizing traveling to continuously add more and more dazzle to traveling. By listing it, it allows the reader to imagine it line by line and easily picture the fun in going out and exploring.  Using Conrad’s descriptive lines for imagery easily gives readers a pleasant image to think about.

 Human beings, hospitable and festive.

 As if by enchantment

 At the image of the pensive forest

We left at noon

So. Farewell.

In the first poem, I tried to make everything sound bright and enjoyable. Saying the human race are “hospitable and festive,” gives readers the thought of happy towns people welcoming travelers in. Using words like “pensive” gives a positive image of the forests and the world outside. I decided to end the first poem with a “So. Farewell,” and giving a good bye to allow the speaker of my poem to live a more rewarding life. All the positive messages are similar to how the Marlow thought of his journey. He thought of how rewarding it would be to fill in the blank spots of the map. Similarly, my poem talks about the joys of traveling to build up to the reality that will soon come.

Ordinary man,

factitious, no doubt.

Human beings,

nothing but black shadows,

savage or simply mean.

 

The second part of the poem follows the “Heart of Darkness,” in a way that suddenly, reality quickly comes in and shows that the world is not as perfect. I first took the example of an “ordinary man” and stated that he had façade. I go on deeper to show that humans are not “hospitable and festive” but “savage or simply mean.” This part ties to the secret thoughts of the manager and his thoughts on Kurtz. He stated his scorn for Kurtz just because he was able to acquire ivory at an extraordinary rate. He would even wish he would die.

Shoot you without

adequate motive.

Save the ivory,

they fancy for it.

The horror!

This part, gives the meaning of how people can be greedy and unethical. Similar to Kurtz, with greed, people can do anything to get what they want. People sometimes hurt other people in order to get what they want. Ivory is a prime example of why Kurtz chose to live the style he does. He would kill to get ivory. It is a horrible thought to think about. This part greatly contrasts to the first poem, similarly to how the first part of the story contrasts with the second part. I feel like the second poem breaks down the image of the perfect world similarly to the second part of the book.

        Darkness was here yesterday.

Deal with this shadow confused.

        Black shapes near the same tree.

Human beings,

Like the wilderness itself.

Embrace

intense blackness.

 

In the third part of the book, drawing up to the conclusion, there was secrets being held and kept away. I tried to give the image that people are hiding secrets and themselves by using words like “blackness,” “wilderness,” “shadow,” and “darkness.” Using the word “confused” gives the readers the hint of how information is left out and how characters in the story don’t find out every bit of information. 

Having a look around,

Then stop to listen,

in this fog.

 

Lastly, sometimes people are left with no other choice than to live and try their best in the “fog.” I used the fog to show the difficulty to find the truth. In part 3 of the book, many things were kept a secret. I tried to tie the book in the last poem about secrets and the unknown.

Conrad’s story and diction allow the creation of the poems to be completely easily. His descriptive words allowed perfect phrases to set an image to the reader’s minds. His shift in events and thoughts in the story allows it to become engaging. Lastly the open ended ending allows the reader to think and presume their own answers and ponder about them. I tried to show Conrad’s style in the three poems and I feel like I succeed.   

Heart of Darkness Poems

Escape (8)

 

fallaces sunt rerum species 
The appearances of things are deceptive.

        Bound on other conquests. (5)

Leading up  the hill, (23)

followed the sea, (5)

down stony hills, (31)

over the empty land. (31)

        Human beings (100), hospitable and festive. (22)

 As if by enchantment (100)

 At the image of (103) the pensive forest (100)

We left at noon (113)

So. Farewell. (23)

 

Part II

His Plans (124)

 

        Ordinary man, (95)

factitious no doubt. (102)

Human beings, (100)

nothing but black shadows, (26)

savage or simply mean. (80)

        Shoot you (95) without (8)

adequate motive. (52)

        Save the ivory, (104)

they (9) fancy for it. (95)

The horror! (125)

 

Part III

Depths of the Forest (94)

 

        Darkness was here yesterday. (7)

Deal with this shadow (107) confused. (108)

        Black shapes (26) near the same tree. (27)

Human beings, (100)

Like the wilderness itself. (103)

Embrace (103)

intense blackness. (108)

        Having a look around, (108)

Then stop to listen, (110)

in this fog. (67)