Hamlet as a Man of Inaction
Humans are creatures of habit, we get into a daily routine, and over
time, learning from
experience our mind equips itself to dealing with certain situations
that we encounter on a
regular basis, when this routine is broken by an unexpected event our
minds can be
inadequately equipped to deal with this because you can only learn
from teaching or
experience. When a lightening bolt strikes out of the blue; a death of
a loved one or such
we immediately see things from another perspective, something like
this can make us see
things in a whole different light, things that you once thought you
were sure of can take
on a whole new face and cause us to wonder how we were ever so stupid
to see what may
now appear blatantly obvious. This may be for the better or for the
worse but in any case
it will almost certainly cause a turnaround in how we may see things
in the future, this is
what makes us human, are ability to learn from experience and put it
into practice to
hopefully avoid a similar situation ever befalling us again.
A personal tragedy will obviously affect every person differently, it
all depends on how
many comparable situations we have encountered before, how much we
expected it and
how much we are willing to accept that bad things happen and move on.
For any student away studying at university in a foreign country to be
recalled out of the
blue for such a matter as the death of their seemingly healthy father,
who has apparently
lost his life in
such an unceremonious way as being bitten by a snake while asleep
would be a
...
... middle of paper ...
... shortly after drinking and it is
at this point it is
Laertes who announces Claudius as a fiend, not Hamlet, even now he has
seen his mother
die before his very own eyes, Laertes and hamlet make there peace ,and
with Hamlets
last breaths he eventually executes his action, he forces Claudius to
drink from the
poisoned cup, and with this, his deed is done, he has avenged his
father, and he now has
the weight lifted from his shoulders, but his lack of pragmatic action
has left the court a
bloodbath, his inability to act without thinking has been his
downfall.
Maybe if he was to have killed Claudius as soon as he confirmed he was
the murderer,
then this would have been a different story, but the there would not
have been a play to
be written for us to enjoy hundreds of years later.
Hamlet: Hamlet's Sanity & nbsp; & nbsp; “Great wits are sure to madness near allied, and thin partitions do. their bounds divide.” Though John Dryden's quote was not made in regard to William Shakespeare's Hamlet, it relates very well to the argument of whether or not Hamlet went insane. When a character such as Hamlet is under scrutiny, it can sometimes be difficult to determine what state he is in at. particular moments in the play.
An enraged Hamlet mistakenly slays Polonius. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are sent to their inconsequential deaths only when he is inspired by pirates to save his own life. These murders involved no elaborate schemes but were simply enacted. Yet with all his planning, his opportunities, his justification, why can he not kill Claudius?
Even though Hamlet is a prince, he has little control over the course of his life. In that time many things were decided for the princes and princesses such as their education and even who they married. This was more or less the normal way of life for a child of the monarch. But in the case of Hamlet, any of the control he thought he had, fell away with the murder of his father. Having his father, the king, be killed by his own brother, sent Hamlet into a state of feeling helpless and out of control. Cooped up in a palace with no real outlet, he tries to control at least one aspect of his life. Hamlet deliberately toys with Ophelia's emotions in order to feel in control of something since he cannot control the situation with Claudius.
...e up the chance to kill Claudius himself because he would not get enough punishment that he deserved in the after life if he killed him then. Claudius would have to be a worthy adversary if Hamlet felt that he deserved to suffer also in the after life.
take revenge upon Claudius, and he will do so by acting insane until the time is
but he did not, he always seemed to find some excuse not to do it. I wonder if he killed Claudius the first chance he
Tragedy, Shakespeare had come to see when he was writing Hamlet, is a kind of consecration of the common elements of man's moral life. Shakespeare introduces the common man in Hamlet not for what we are apt to think of as his "commonness" but for this strange power however you care to name it that he possesses-we have used art, or virtue, or we might have borrowed from Henry James "the individual vision of decency." In Tragedy there is no longer a Chorus moving round the altar of a god; but if Proust is right the spectators are still participants in a supernatural ceremony.
The way we see ourselves is often reflected in the way we act. Hamlet views himself as different to those young nobles around him such as Fortinbras and Laertes. This reality leads us to believe that over time he has become even more motivated to revenge his father's death, and find out who his true friends are. How can you be honest in a world full of deceit and hate? His seven soliloquies tell us that while the days go by he grows more cunning as he falls deeper into his madness. This fact might have lead Hamlet to believe that suicide is what he really wants for his life's course.
Claudius was even punished after death. His throne and whole castle was taken over by Fortinbras. Not only where his wife and friend dead, but he later died himself by his brother's son. Claudius killed and his turn to die came, but it took some time and other people to die too.
In philosophy, a long debated problem exists regarding the idea of fate versus free will. If free will exists, then predetermined events do not occur. As humans, the heart of the problem lays in the existence of a deity governing over society, or rather, the ability of humans to influence their own future. Literature has acknowledged this key dilemma, ranging from Greek tragedies to modern philosophical novels. In Shakespeare’s tragedy Hamlet, fate plays a large role during the events of the novel, when Hamlet takes revenge for his father over his murderous uncle. During the time Hamlet takes place, many cultural elements act on the events of the play. Honor was of utmost importance at this time, causing the characters to be persuaded by the idea of honor tied to avenging a parent’s murder. Furthermore, the role of women of the time period shows the expected subservient nature of women. Women were concerned weak and fragile, their marriages were arranged, virginity was valued above all else in woman, and the only option left for a disgraced, either divorced or unmarriable woman was to join o nunnery or a brothel. The fate of the characters in Hamlet comes largely from their expected roles. Fate acts as a necessary component in any tragedy, including Hamlet and propels the events of the story. Hamlet exemplifies the inexorableness of fate and the futileness of free will and the actions of a person, since the novel ends with his death. In Act III, Scene 1 of Hamlet, Shakespeare confirms the inevitability of fate and the governance of a higher being through the actions of Hamlet, Claudius, Polonius, and Ophelia.
Shakespeare’s play Hamlet is a complex and ambiguous public exploration of key human experiences surrounding the aspects of revenge, betrayal and corruption. The Elizabethan play is focused centrally on the ghost’s reoccurring appearance as a symbol of death and disruption to the chain of being in the state of Denmark. The imagery of death and uncertainty has a direct impact on Hamlet’s state of mind as he struggles to search for the truth on his quest for revenge as he switches between his two incompatible values of his Christian codes of honour and humanist beliefs which come into direct conflict. The deterioration of the diseased state is aligned with his detached relationship with all women as a result of Gertrude’s betrayal to King Hamlet which makes Hamlet question his very existence and the need to restore the natural order of kings. Hamlet has endured the test of time as it still identifies with a modern audience through the dramatized issues concerning every human’s critical self and is a representation of their own experience of the bewildering human condition, as Hamlet struggles to pursuit justice as a result of an unwise desire for revenge.
As often associated with a tragedy, a conflict usually ensues between a protagonist and another force in the play. A tragedy is ‘a serious drama typically describing a conflict between the protagonist and a superior force and having a sorrowful or disastrous conclusion that elicits pity or terror’ (Webster's dictionary). Given its structure and depth in characterization, this play will or can be analyzed and interpreted from various perspectives and beliefs. However, my analysis of the play is conducted on the basis of various components which are: Hamlet as a tragic hero, the ironic message conveyed in the play, the roles of its characters, the role and personification of madness, the role of paranormality, the role of friends and family, the role of inaction, the role of sex and violence, and the role of death as portrayed in the play. Based on literary definitions and portrayal of his character, there is popular belief that Hamlet as the protagonist acted to satisfy his own conscience but could his actions be attributed purely to his desire or was he being influenced by other factors?
There are many reasons why Hamlet had his downfall. One being his decision to keeping the murder of his father a secret. Another one being the betrayals of his closest friends. Perhaps if Guildenstern or Rosencrantz had been there for Hamlet, to rely and place trust upon, he might not had to fell so alone. A little sympathy from his girlfriend Ophelia, and even his mother Gertrude would have been nice as well. Unfortunately Ophelia is held back from Hamlet, due to her father. Gertrude marries his uncle Claudius, who is responsible for his fathers death, and is looking to kill him next. And Guildenstern and Rosencrantz are ordered by Claudius to spy on Hamlet, and betray him as a friend.
The tragedy of Hamlet, Shakespeare’s most popular and greatest tragedy, presents his genius as a playwright and includes many numbers of themes and literary techniques. In all tragedies, the main character, called a tragic hero, suffers and usually dies at the end. Prince Hamlet is a model example of a Shakespearean tragic hero. Every tragedy must have a tragic hero. A tragic hero must own many good traits, but has a flaw that ultimately leads to his downfall. If not for this tragic flaw, the hero would be able to survive at the end of the play. A tragic hero must have free will and also have the characteristics of being brave and noble. In addition, the audience must feel some sympathy for the tragic hero.
In writing Hamlet, William Shakespeare plumbed the depths of the mind of the protagonist, Prince Hamlet, to such an extent that this play can rightfully be considered a psychological drama.