Seeing Eye to Eye

After a bumpy road of fiddling, frustrations, and findings – I believe I have broken through the surface of being worthy of the title “Voyant,” or perhaps as the french may call it: “voyeuse.”   Cheap jokes aside, I feel I have molded my mind enough around  Voyeur to be able to call it my specialized field above others.  Although I initially lacked this confident resolve in my previous post, continued meetings with a constructive team has seen me through to viewing Voyeur and Hamlet with a fresh set of eyes.
The tool enables a broad look at word connectivity within the text. Visual tools like “knots,” “word trends” (as examined in “Getting Off on a Bad Foot”) and “lava” provide a variety of mediums through which to display evidence in a specific fashion or equally varied to appeal to a broader user base. For each and ever self-contained “side tool” there is the option to either play or to read further into it so previous knowledge of any tool is completely unnecessary.   Our group met with more than a little confusion when attempting to analyze the mystery surrounding  knot interpretation.  After both playing with it individually and within group meetings we have come to a semi-understanding of the somewhat erratic knotting patterns.  Without the Hermeneuti information page, we would not have had any clue where to start in comprehending the tangling mess.  Any  way you choose to slice it, Voyeur is undoubtedly user friendly and that is potentially the key to what sets this apart from both its predecessor TAPor and as well from all other digital analysis aids.

As far as analyzing 3.4 has gone, the only obstacle I have encountered has been my own stubborn preference.  As a group, we have come up with several ways in which to tackle interpretation using our tool.  No matter which hypothesis we might have selected, we would have an ample amount of evidence supporting it due to our new understanding of Voyeur.
Some examples have been*:

  • Is Hamlet truly feigning madness or is it deeper than he fully understands?
  • Sexual tensions and the relationship between Gertrude and Hamlet – strictly familial?
  • What is the purpose of Polonius in this scene and why did his death come about in such an under-exaggerated manner?
  • Analysis of the presence of the ghost and the only tender picture painted for Hamlet and his dysfunctional family.

*Stay tuned to find out where we went with our brilliance…Coming to you, this Monday at 9AM (MT)!
On my own, I have played around with both aspects of scene versus entire corpus analysis and I far prefer examining the entire play and other plays/literary works in conjunction with  Hamlet. Although Voyeur has proven more than useful and enlightening to examine a specific scene and its advantages are obvious – my specific tastes lead me to seek wider horizons.  Perhaps my eyes are bigger than my stomach, however phase one has but whet my appetite for the main course next phase.
On another note, one of phase 1’s project requirements realized with the highest has been having been part  of such a reliable and hard working group.  There has been plenty I, and each one of us for that  matter, have put forward individually.  However, it would have taken a considerably longer time if we had not all pushed forward in united effort.  For every discovery that I have personally made using Voyeur, such as seeking out connections of good and evil and their escalating value within the play, I have had at least one peer add their discoveries to my own creating more concrete conclusions rather than theories. Past academic experience has proven a particular rarity in being placed in a group of such high work ethic and dependability.  Our communication is solid both inside and out of meetings and peer brainstorming is equally distributed and all opinions examined with respect.  Aside from newly acquired expertise, I would certainly  bring the copacetic nature that this group has exhibited forward into phase two.

2 thoughts on “Seeing Eye to Eye

  1. Voyeur (Voyant?) sounds like a great tool- both use and display wise. Having only briefly used the program in the workshop, I thought it was mostly about pictures and diagrams. After reading in your post that those diagrams can be decoded fairly simply, it sounds more interesting to use.Like the “knots” function you discuss– now that I know there is a sense to be made from it, it seems a lot more interesting/ full of different possibilities to me. I’m really intrigued to see how this program could work in conjunction with WordHoard, especially since there are so many possibilities for analysis and display.

  2. Your post has made me very excited to get going with Phase 2! I completely agree with your feelings about Phase 1 merely “whetting my appetite” for Phase 2. Although every tool we have been assigned has its individual pros and cons, I know for a fact once we all disperse into our new groups with an expert for each tool, many of the voids in the tools will be filled with the assets of others. It seems to me like Voyeur has a lot of great qualities that will be helpful for our next stage of studying Hamlet. I very much understand your frustration with being limited to studying only one scene when there is so much possibility for deeper findings while analyzing the play as a whole! I think this point could apply to everyone in class, but the fact that everyone was able to adapt to the study of a single scene truly shows diligence and cooperation amongst the groups! I wonder what the purpose studying a single scene with Voyeur could bring to the table in this course, versus studying the whole play?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *