In The Tragedy of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark, there are two young men: Laertes and Hamlet. Laertes is the son of the King’s advisor, Polonius, and the brother of Ophelia. Hamlet is the son of the deceased King Hamlet and present Queen Gertrude. Although both men are in the royal circle and would seem to have the same lifestyle, Laertes is the perfect foil for Hamlet. A foil is a character that shows qualities that are in contrast with the qualities of another character, intended to highlight the traits of the other character. Laertes is the immaculate foil of Hamlet because he takes immediate action to revenge his father instead of only speaking of it, he does not have fluctuating feelings whether to kill his father’s murderer or not, and takes …show more content…
Once Hamlet heard of his father’s death, he did not take immediate action to kill King Claudius. Rather, Hamlet let considerable time pass, thinking and talking of many plans, before he subsequently took action to kill Claudius, only after his mother also died at the hands of the murderous king.
In the rising action of Hamlet, Hamlet, in his madness, kills Polonius in suspicion of him being the King. Laertes’ reaction to his father’s death is the distinct opposite of Hamlet’s. Hours after his father’s death, Laertes storms the castle in rage, “How came he dead? I’ll not be juggled with. To hell, allegiance! Vows, to the blackest devil! Conscience and grace, to the profoundest pit! I dare damnation. To this point I stand
That both the worlds I give to negligence.
Let come what comes, only I’ll be revenged Most thoroughly for my father” (IV, v, 135-141).
Laertes needed no time to think about what had happened. All he knows is that someone murdered his father and that is enough for him to take on whatever task he must to avenge him. He agreed to fight and poison Hamlet so that he shall fall dead and the score would then be
…show more content…
Once Laertes finds out about Polonius’ death, he is ready for confrontation, “To cut his throat i’ th’ church” (IV, vii, 129). Polonius dying at the hands of someone else sealed the deal for Laertes getting revenge. There was no debating. There were no second thoughts. No one was getting a chance to change Laertes’ mind. Like a horse with blinders, all Laertes could see now, was what was in front of him: killing his father’s murderer. However, Hamlet had a far different approach in how he felt about his father’s murder and who was responsible. Instead of making his mind up to kill Claudius the moment he found out he was the one accountable for his father’s death, he took a more methodical approach to his revenge. Hamlet struggled with himself about having to kill someone and wondered if he should kill Claudius at all. Hamlet had an opportunity to kill Claudius and end everything, but he decided it wasn’t the right time and Claudius went unharmed. Hamlet was cowardly and didn’t have enough drive to revenge his
In Shakespeare’s “The Tragedy of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark” Hamlet and Laertes act as dramatic foils, where their similarities are used to highlight their differences. Each character learns that his father has been murdered and each plots his revenge against the murderer. In the first act of the play, the ghost of Hamlet’s father tells him “Let not
A major difference between Laertes and Hamlet is that Laertes didn't procrastinate in his attempt at revenge. He went right to it with the encouragement of Claudius. His hastiness is what gets him killed in the end. Because Laertes doesn't think long about getting his revenge gives the reader reason to compare Laertes to and think about Hamlets' struggle to decide weather [H-50] revenge is the right thing to do. [SS -1] He contemplates through the whole play on weather [H-50] to kill Claudius or not, leaving the reader with the sense that Hamlet is very careful when making decisions. [Doesn't this point deserve more discussion?
...e story. Indeed, if Hamlet acts quickly, there would be only one act of Hamlet. Laertes, upon hearing of his father’s demise wants swift and fervent justice. Although he is the more impassioned of the two, it is this incisiveness that leads to Laertes’ demise. He allows himself to be manipulated, enamored by the king’s rhetoric. Laertes, suddenly realizing the plot at hand, repents for his killing of Hamlet, true to his character even in the face of death. Hamlet seeks to blame his "madness" for the death of Polonius, and never admits fault for the fate of his schoolmates.
Hamlet questions what may or may not happen however Laertes just wants the revenge fast and effective. Although these characters have different standards when it comes to revenge, they both immediately blamed and directed their anger towards Claudius when they found out their father’s were dead. Hamlet’s reason to blame Claudius is simply because he is his father’s murderer. In 1.5 while Hamlet is talking to the ghost of his father he says, “Haste me to know ’t, that I, with wings as swift/As meditation or the thoughts of love/May sweep to my revenge” (Shakespeare 1.5.31-33). At first is seems as if Hamlet would seek revenge right away because he seems eager to find out who the killer is and when he does find out he says he knew it was Claudius all along. He is furious and after this part in the play, Hamlet’s anger is mainly focused on Claudius. On the other hand when Laertes found out Polonius is dead he went straight to Claudius assuming it was him. By doing this he shows that he is controlled by his impulses unlike Hamlet who waited until he got proof to act on his fury. Laertes also blamed Claudius for not giving his father a proper burial, which can relate to Hamlet’s anger too because Hamlet felt as if there was not enough mourning for his father death. Not only did they both lose their fathers, but they both lost Ophelia, a female figure in their lives that they both loved.
As described earlier, Hamlet is slow to act. Laertes, on the other hand, acts quickly and with precision, wasting no time in acquiring his target and formulating a plan. Robert Palfrey Utter, Jr., puts it best, Hamlet and Laertes both come to the same conclusion that murder must be carried out, but Hamlet reaches that conclusion only “after he has had a few minutes to think it over.” (140) Once Laertes finds out that the man who killed his father was Hamlet, he is ready to charge in and kill him as soon as possible. He is only stopped by Claudius, who advises him on a more subtle approach.
Laertes’ main decision in Hamlet was how to seek revenge on Prince Hamlet for killing Polonius. There are seven steps to the decision-making process. First, Laertes had to identify the decision that had to be made. Laertes did follow this step by looking for a solution of his father’s death. Next, Laertes should have gathered information relevant to his situation. Instead of this step, Laertes automatically assumed that he had to kill someone without knowing what really happened to Polonius. Then, Laertes should have identified his alternatives of the decision. Laertes did not explore alternative in the play. He immediately met with the king and decided to kill Prince Hamlet without looking at different ways to approach the situation. After exploring alternatives, Laertes should have weighed the evidence of the situation. The only evidence that Laertes had was the king’s word that Hamlet...
Ironic as it sounds, Laertes is the person to thank for Hamlet’s eternal peace even though he was the one who poisoned the blade that killed Hamlet. The reasoning behind this is that even though Hamlet and Laertes are responsible for each other’s they both confessed their guilt and asked for each other’s forgiveness, which they both received. Denmark’s Protestant religion states that those who die without the chance to ask for forgiveness will wait in Purgatory until their judgement is passed and if not for Laertes opening up to Hamlet, they both would have passed on to the afterlife without forgiveness and would have to wait in Purgatory. Laertes is also given the credit of bringing to light the foul deeds that Claudius carried out such as the planned murder of Prince Hamlet because if Hamlet were to accuse Claudius of everything he did then the accusation would have been heard by deaf ears because everyone still thought Hamlet was insane at that point. Hamlet was given a final chance to finally take revenge on Claudius for the deaths of those close to Hamlet and restore the kingdom to order. All of this was managed in Hamlet’s final hour when he finally
This belief leads to the death of Polonius, and furthermore to the death of Hamlet. In the next scene, Hamlet's fate is sealed. Polonius, the "Wretched, rash, intruding fool", (81) was up to his old tricks, while Hamlet accidentally slays Polonius mistaking Polonius for Claudius. Later on, Laertes returns to avenge his father. "How came he dead?" (99) asked
...his father, ruined his mother, and even tried to kill Hamlet himself, he is still not confident enough to take action. However just like Laertes, Hamlet does get his revenge in the end, but was it worth all the unwanted death?
Both Hamlet’s and Laertes’ fathers were killed. When Laertes discovered that his father’s been murdered he immediately assumes that Claudius is the killer. As a result of his speculation he moves to avenge Polonius’ death. Laertes lines in Act IV Scene 5 provide insight into his mind displaying his desire for revenge at any cost. “To hell, allegiance!
...of the foils Shakespeare used to develop Hamlet's character. The one that did the best in accomplishing this task was Laertes, though. Laertes and Hamlet had a common goal, and if it hadn't been for him[,] the story would have taken a totally different route. Polonius was a good foil in that he convinced everyone that Ophelia was the cause of Hamlet's madness. If he hadn't been Ophelia's father, this part of the story may not have been as effective.
[4, 1, 40] These idiosyncrasies are observed in the play when Claudius becomes concerned he will lose power as King and the likelihood Hamlet will murder him to avenge his father’s death. This is apparent when Gertrude informs Claudius that Hamlet is, “Mad as the sea and wind, when both contend which is mightier”. [4,1,6] With these thoughts daunting Claudius, he approaches Laertes in a Machiavellian manner to convince him to murder Hamlet, for he knows Laertes is angry, deranged and “Vows to the blackest devil” [4,5,131] after the death of his father. In doing so, Claudius has the intent to use Machiavellian powers over Laertes who is currently mentally unstable, with the objective being that Laertes will murder Hamlet to avenge his own father’s (Polonius) death. Claudius is able to successfully persuade Laertes in a manipulative speech, especially with his snide comment, “Not that I think you did not love your father, but that I know love is begun by time, and that I see a passage of proof.” [4,7,96] Claudius’ malicious comment indicates he is using his power over Laertes, so that the burden and repercussions do not rest on him, so that he may retain his authority as King. By utilizing his power over Laertes, Claudius is successful, as Hamlet is slain, however, as reflected in Claudius’
In William Shakespeare's tragedy Hamlet, Laertes, Fortinbras and Hamlet find themselves in similar situations. While Hamlet waits for the right time to avenge his father's death, Laertes learns of his father's death and immediately wants vengeance, and Fortinbras awaits his chance to recapture land that used to belong to his father. Laertes and Fortinbras go about accomplishing their desires quite differently than Hamlet. While Hamlet acts slowly and carefully, Laertes and Fortinbras seek their revenge with haste. Although Laertes and Fortinbras are minor characters, Shakespeare molds them in order to contrast with Hamlet. Fortinbras and, to a greater extent, Laertes act as foils to Hamlet with respect to their motives for revenge, execution of their plans and behavior while carrying out their plans.
He has the ability to perform tasks that may be unpleasant or dangerous. Laertes does not simply try to kill someone by thinking cautiously the whole time, but by directly confronting them and facing them head-on. When Laertes returns home to Denmark he even confronts Claudius about the death of his father. Swearing Laertes says “I dare damnation. To this point I stand,/That both the worlds I give to negligence,/Let come what comes, only I’ll be reveng’d/Most throughly for my father.” (IV. v. 133-136). With this declaration Laertes plots with Claudius to kill Hamlet and they construct a plan to have Laertes fence with Hamlet and for him to kill him. They instrument a plot of revenge for the death of Polonius, quickly coming up with three ways to kill Hamlet: stabbing him with an unblunted sword, placing poison on the sword, and poisoning Hamlet’s drink (IV. vii.). After they construct this plan they swiftly utilize the plan. Laertes did not wait for the perfect moment, at the perfect time, and at the perfect place. He created the place, time, and moment to carry out the dangerous task. Hamlet, however, waited and waited for what he thought one day would be the perfect moment in which he could kill his uncle. Even when Hamlet had an opportunity to kill Claudius, he talked himself out of it. When compared to Laertes, Hamlet is a coward because of his inability to
Laertes has the ability to perform tasks that may be unpleasant or dangerous. Laertes does not simply try to kill someone by thinking cautiously the whole time, but by directly confronting them and facing them head-on. When Laertes returns home to Denmark he even confronts Claudius about the death of his father. Swearing Laertes says “I dare damnation. To this point I stand,/That both the worlds I give to negligence,/Let come what comes, only I’ll be reveng’d/Most thoroughly for my father.” (IV. v. 133-136). With this declaration Laertes plots with Claudius to kill Hamlet and they construct a plan to have Laertes fence with Hamlet and for him to kill him. They instrument a plot of revenge for the death of Polonius, quickly coming up with three ways to kill Hamlet: stabbing him with an unblunted sword, placing poison on the sword, and poisoning Hamlet’s drink (IV. vii.). After they construct this plan they swiftly utilize the plan. Laertes did not wait for the perfect moment, at the perfect time, and at the perfect place. He created the place, time, and moment to carry out the dangerous task. Hamlet, however, waited and waited for what he thought one day would be the perfect moment in which he could kill his uncle. Even when Hamlet had an opportunity to kill Claudius, he talked himself out of it. When compared to Laertes, Hamlet is a coward because of his inability