Charles Forker argues that Marcus Andronicus, after discovering Lavinia mutilated, raped, and mutilated, "erects a barrier of imaginative language between himself and the object of his contemplation." It's an interesting question: Does Marcus create an elaborate metaphor comparing Lavinia to a "cut and cut" tree to escape the horrible reality of her condition, or does he address a horrible situation head-on with the help of typical Shakespearean dialogue? Comparing the scene in Titus Andronicus with similar scenes in King Lear and Hamlet one can only conclude that this style of elaborate speech is typical only of Shakespeare and does not serve as a distraction from the action on the stage. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an 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 grim future that awaits him in the dungeon, yet he launches into a beautiful and wholly inappropriate ode to his daughter: No, no, no, no ! Come, let's go to prison: we two alone will sing like caged birds: when you ask me for blessing I will kneel and ask you for forgiveness: so we will live, and pray, and sing, and tell the old story. tales, and laugh at golden butterflies, and listen to poor thieves talk of court news; and we will also talk to them: who loses and who wins; who is inside, who is outside; - And we take charge of the mystery of things, As if we were God's spies: and we will wear, In a walled prison, packs and sects of great Who ebb and flow according to the moon. (24:7-19) Note that, despite a sweet metaphor comparing himself and his daughter Goneril to a pair of songbirds locked in a cage, Lear faces the reality of the situation: they are locked up in prison probably for the rest of their lives. The "imaginative language" cited by Forker is also found here, but it does not detract from the meaning of the discussion. 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 enriching it with a beautiful metaphor that contrasts the scene to perfectly make the play a joy for the reader. Hamlet, Hamlet has the opportunity to offer a sad lament when he discovers that his love, Ophelia, has died. He falls short of the proportions of Lear and Marcus when he cries: What is he whose sorrow bears such emphasis, whose phrase of sorrow evokes the wandering stars and makes them stand like wounded listeners with wonder? This is I, Hamlet the Dane (5:1:250-255). Perhaps the reason Hamlet does not offer a more elaborate speech is because of the context. At this point in the play, Hamlet is trying to make everyone believe that he is actually crazy, so a long, lucid speech to his dead love may have betrayed him. After all, just a few lines later Hamlet tells Laertes that he will "eat a crocodile" (5:1:273). A better example of mourning in Hamlet is found at the beginning of the play when Hamlet first discovers the truth about the deaths of his father, his murderous uncle, and his incestuous mother: O all ye guests of heaven! Oh earth! What else? And should I mate hell? O fie, hold, hold, my heart, and you, my nerves, do not grow old immediately, but carry me rigidly up. Remember! Yes, poor ghost, while memory occupies a place in this distracted globe. Remember yourself! Yes, from the table of my memory I will erase all the futile fond memories, all the book saws, all the forms, all the pressures of the past that youth and observation copied there, and your commandment all alone will live within the book and volume of my brain, not mixed with matter, 1987.