In the play Hamlet, by William Shakespeare, we observe Hamlet as an incredibly complex and bewildering character that upon first glance, seems to undergo a plethora of predicaments. Upon identification of such obstacles, we begin to wonder about whether his entirely fictitious existence in the play classifies him as sane while the world around him is in a way, insane or vise-versa. In addition, one of the main problems that superficially seems to be at the root of his conflicts is his melancholy. This is a condition that has always identified with him throughout the entire play, even still presenting itself up until the very end of Act V. In conclusion, the cause of his affliction is generally simplistic but drawn-out, serving to impact his actions significantly. Before deducing any response about his sanity, we must arrive on terms regarding his personality and his character traits and the logistics about the workings of the world around him which seems fairly small as the majority of the play takes place in Denmark, specifically the prestigious Elsinore Castle. Additionally, it’s assumed that the characters around him simulate his environment as Denmark itself does not pose much significant relevance aside from the fact that Hamlet admires Prince Fortinbras for his belligerence. First, Hamlet tells Horatio and Marcellus, “How strange or odd soe’er I bear myself” (Hamlet 1.5.171). This signifies that he’ll act strangely in the future in any way he sees fit. As a result, while his character may be prudent, reflexive and philosophical, he is still “prone to rash and impulsive acts of violence” (“Hamlet”, Sparknote Editors 1). With this in mind, I believe Hamlet does cross the line between sanity and insanity b... ... middle of paper ... ...ted his actions and speech and as a result, influenced him. Finally, while there are many interpretations of his mental state, there’s definitive evidence that it did in-fact, alter his personality and intensified some of his character traits. Works Cited "Hamlet." Sparknotes. Sparknote Editors, n.d. Web. . . Smith, Ray. "The Case of Hamlet's Lunacy." Smith's Hyper Hamlet. N.p., n.d. Web. . . Blits, Jan H., Lanham, Md. “Deadly thought: Hamlet and the Human soul.” Lexington Books, 2001. . Print. Crawford, Alexander W. Hamlet, an ideal prince, and other essays in Shakesperean interpretation: Hamlet; Merchant of Venice; Othello; King Lear. Boston R.G. Badger, 1916. Shakespeare Online. 20 Aug. 2009. < http://www.shakespeare-online.com/plays/hamlet/hamletmelancholy.html >.
After demolishing the theories of other critics, Bradley concluded that the essence of Hamlet’s character is contained in a three-fold analysis of it. First, that rather than being melancholy by temperament, in the usual sense of “profoundly sad,” he is a person of unusual nervous instability, one liable to extreme and profound alterations of mood, a potential manic-depressive type. Romantic, we might say. Second, this Hamlet is also a person of “exquisite moral sensibility, “ hypersensitive to goodness, a m...
Shakespeare, William. "Hamlet." Madden, Frank. Exploring Literature. 4th ed. New York: Pearson Longman, 2009. Print 539-663
A popular topic of discussion for Shakespearian critics is whether or not Hamlet is sane at various points in the play. Usually, this digresses into a question of at what point Hamlet crosses the fine line which marks the bounds of sanity into the realm of insanity. This is a confusing matter to sort out, due to the fact that it is hard to tell when the prince is acting, and when he is really and truly out of his mind. The matter of determining the time of crossing over is further complicated by the fact that everyone around him is constantly speaking of madness. At the end we must either conclude that Hamlet is an extremely talented actor capable of staying in character under the most trying circumstances, or that he is human and as a result his sanity gives way to the many external emotional barrages coming his way. The more likely conclusion is that Hamlet is at some point insane. What is left to discover is at what point does this crossover occur, and second, what are the main contributing factors in his mental collapse. I will ignore the issue of the point of crossover, and let another paper consider that point. Rather, I propose that Hamlet's religious beliefs, acquired at the University of Wittenberg, heavily contributed to the loss of his sanity.
Findlay, Alison. "Hamlet: A Document in Madness." New Essays on Hamlet. Ed. Mark Thornton Burnett and John Manning. New York: AMS Press, 1994. 189-205.
In Act I, Scene V, after hearing the ghost’s demand for revenge, Hamlet says in advance that he will consciously feign madness while seeking the opportune moment to kill Claudius. Therefore, it is hard to conclude that he coincidentally became insane after making such a vow. Hamlet’s supposed madness becomes his primary way of interacting with the other characters during most of the play, in addition to being a major device that Shakespeare uses to develop his character. Still, the question remains: Is Hamlet really crazy or just pretending? The major conflict, which seems to obscure the possibility of obtaining clarity on the answer to this question, is Hamlet’s inability to find any certain moral truths as he works his way toward revenge.
Mack, Maynard. “The World of Hamlet.” Twentieth Century Interpretations of Hamlet. Ed. David Bevington. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1968.
Findlay, Alison. "Hamlet: A Document in Madness." New Essays on Hamlet. Ed. Mark Thornton Burnett and John Manning. New York: AMS Press, 1994. 189-205.
In this paper I will be analyzing and discussing how these four soliloquies reflect changes in Hamlet’s mental state; his
Hamlet’s madness, authentic? This question has been debated by scholars and professors throughout the ages.
As a young man, Hamlet's mind is full of many questions about the events that occur during his complicated life. This leads to the next two categories of his mind. His need to seek the truth and his lack of confidence in his own impulses. Hamlets’ confusion in what he wants to ...
Shakespeare, William. “Hamlet.” The Norton Introduction to Literature. Ed. Kelly J. Mays. 11th ed. New York: Norton, 2013.1709-1804. Print.
Boklund, Gunnar. "Hamlet." Essays on Shakespeare. Ed. Gerald Chapman. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1965.
Mack, Maynard. "The World of Hamlet." Yale Review. vol. 41 (1952) p. 502-23. Rpt. in Readings on The Tragedies. Ed. Clarice Swisher. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 1996.
Mack, Maynard. "The World of Hamlet." Yale Review. vol. 41 (1952) p. 502-23. Rpt. in Readings on The Tragedies. Ed. Clarice Swisher. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 1996.
Hamlet’s insanity is an extremely odd and clever tool that the prince uses to confuse those around him, so he may complete his plan of killing King Claudius. When madness is reasonable for Hamlet's goals, he puts on an "antic disposition" (I.v.173). On the other hand, when sanity is needed, Hamlet returns to being logical. Hamlet explained that he is "mad north-north-west" (II.ii.376), meaning he is insane at times and quite normal at others. Therefore, Hamlet uses this strategy to complete his scheme, but ironically, slows down the process. To begin, Hamlet shifts into the realm of insanity to achieve his short-term goals. Hamlet uses his craziness as a tool, changing insanity into the form of being witty, with clever word choice and actions. Furthermore, Hamlet only acts insane towards his enemies or their allies. One example, Hamlet attacks Ophelia, who is with Claudius, with words: "are you honest" (III.i.104), "are you fair" (III.i.106). Hamlet "speaks daggers" (III.ii.387) to Gertrude, because she is the only thing that sep...