This play serves as a comedy in many ways. There are certain differences between a tradegy and comedy. The play is somewhat "goofy" in nature. It lacks a serious tone. If a scence does get serious, it will often be offset by a comedic scene. The characters embody the comedy. What I mean is that the characters are set up to create a funny interaction. Whether they are drunk, have an STD, or are simply stupid, the characters make the audience laugh!
Hamlet and The Laramie Project are two very different plays. The underlying structure of both plays varies. Laramie introduces its characters very quickly. We learn about the main characters in the play by listening to the reactions of others. In Hamlet we learn about other characters as the plot progresses. Laramie leaves more to the reader, because we formulate a character based on the interviews. For example, we learn about Matthew Shepard through his friends and neighbors. The Setting in Hamlet is fairly constant and we are notified if the setting changes. In Laramie, the setting is constantly changing, and new people are always being introduced. Laramie is faster paced. I could imagine elaborate scenery for Hamlet. However, I picture little scenery for Laramie. It would be hard to constantly change the scenery everytime a new character was introduced. The central conflict in both plays is somewhat related. In both plays, a murder took place. Both plays start off with the public not knowing the murderers. The plot slowly unravels in both plays. We are dealing with two very different stories though. One is based on fiction and the other on reality. I believe that comparing these two plays is a great learning experience. It is interesting to see how two vastly different plays can have some similarities. Even though the plays are socially and structurally different, we can still draw connections between them. Comparing these plays helps the modern person analyze the vastly changing scene of theatre.
I believe that Sophocles main objective in the play was to convey the idea of knowing yourself. World peace would be more attainable if everyone knew themselves better. World peace requires many leaders to agree on a common set of regulations. However, it is necessary for individuals to have inner peace before they can achieve peace with others. How is it possible for us to achieve peace if everyone is selfish and greedy? If people calm down their own minds, then they will be more willing to listen to the ideas of others. There are two kinds of people in the world. Proactive people respond to situations with value-based choices. On the other hand, Reactive people respond according to the feelings and attitudes of others. Knowing the self helps people become more proactive because it creates peace within individuals. Every problem stems from the mind. When people are at peace with themselves, they act with more composure and think clearly. People that lack inner peace are often more reactive to the actions of others. World peace would be easier to attain if everyone was proactive. A person who is not affected by the reactions of others can make clearer decisions. This is the essense of Sophocle's message. Oedipus only gained wisdom after he blinded himself. We must not be distracted by the sensory world. Instead we should focus on ourselves.