One could speculate that the human condition is that of fragmentation, a dichotomy of the many aspects of personality that make us who we are. C.G. Jung, the founder of analytical psychology formulated a school of thought called junginism to explain this state of disunity. One theory from the Jungianism school of thought is the process of "individuation.” The process of individuation refers to the course in which an individual unifies and integrates all aspects of his/her personality. Individuation is clear in both the character “Ray Kinsella” from J.D. Salinger’s “Shoeless Joe” and the character Hamlet, from Shakespeare’s “The Tragedy of Hamlet the Prince of Denmark. Unlike Ray Kinsella, Hamlet was not able to reach individuation because of his melancholic depression and the dichotomy of his archetypes.
Firstly, Hamlets process of individuation is stunted because of his melancholic depression. Throughout the play there are several moments where the reader becomes aware of the harmful nature of Hamlets melancholic depression has on his process of individuation. One of the most famous soliloquies in history “too be or not too be” perfectly illustrates how Hamlet’s melancholic depression is to the detriment of his process of individuation. The first portion of the speech is Hamlet contemplating suicide, only to be dissuaded by the fact that it is a sin to end one’s own life “To be, or not to be? That is the question—Whether ’tis nobler in the mind to suffer The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune, Or to take arms against a sea of troubles, And, by opposing, end them? To die…ay, there’s the rub, For in that sleep of death what dreams may come” Hamlet is essentially contemplating the morality of suicide, but is worried that h...
... middle of paper ...
...s hinder him for most of the play. Fortinbra like Hamlet is intent on avenging his father, but he is able to integrate all of his archetypes as part of his psyche, and does not lose his voice of reason in the pursuit of violence.
Works Cited
Maslow, A. H. A Theory of Human Motivation. 1943. http://psychclassics.yorku.ca/Maslow/motivation.htm>. Steel, Piers Ph.D. The Science Of Procrastination. n.d. .
1916, English, Book Edition: Collected Papers on Analytical Psychology / by C. G. Jung ; Authorised Translation Ed. by Dr. Constance E. Long. Jung, C. G. (Carl Gustav), 1875-1961." Collected Papers on Analytical Psychology / by C. G. Jung ; Authorised Translation Ed. by Dr. Constance E. Long. N.p., n.d. Web. 29 Dec. 2013.
< http://trove.nla.gov.au/work/2163221?selectedversion=NBD9383373>
One of the most famous Shakespearean lines-"To be or not to be, that is the question” is found in Hamlet, spoken by the title character himself. While this is the most obvious reference that Hamlet makes to this own philosophy, Hamlet makes frequent proclamations about his stifled life throughout the play. Hamlet views his life in a negative manner, to the point where he finds himself contemplating whether or not to end his own life. Hamlet does not value his life, which causes him to become flustered with himself and his lack of action. Therefore, demonstrating that Hamlet does not value his life as one should.
... loudly for him." (Act V Sc. II) In his closing statement, Fortinbras shows his grace and well-roundedness by honoring Hamlet, and understanding that he too went through what Fortinbras himself had to go through his entire adult life, living without his father. For those reasons, Fortinbras is a true leader, and the best representation in these two plays of a leader according to Hamlet's definition.
Hamlet’s “To be or not to be” soliloquy is conceivably the most prominent soliloquy in the archive of the theatre. Even now, more than 400 years after it was originally written there is still an air of familiarity that reaches others even if they do not know the play itself in detail. In act 3, scene 1, Hamlet’s “To be or not to be” Soliloquy is critical in developing the plot because this is when Hamlet discusses his most suicidal thoughts.
In Hamlet by William Shakespeare, the importance of characters Laertes and Fortinbras have been an issue that's discussed and analyzed by many literary critics. Hamlet, Laertes and Fortinbras are parallel characters in the play. Laertes and Fortinbras are often use by Shakespeare to compare the actions and emotions of Hamlet throughout the play. "They are also important in Hamlet as they are imperative to the plot of the play and the final resolution" (Nardo, 88). Shakespeare placed these three men: Hamlet, Laertes and Fortinbras into similar circumstances, which is, to avenge for their fathers' deaths. The main difference between the three is the way that each of them comes to grief of their fathers' deaths and the way they planned their vengeance.
The theme of vengeance is apparent within the tragedy before the tragedy even begins. King Fortinbras is defeated by King Hamlet, leaving Prince Fortinbras orphaned. This naturally brings about bitterness between Prince Fortinbras and King Hamlet. Prince Fortinbras is angry, within reason. His father was just killed, his lands stolen, and now he is the person to whom all of the duty is left. These feelings lead Fortinbras to a state of angered reactions. He prepares an army to march into Poland and Denmark to recover the lands that his father had lost. He takes action, leaving the rest of his life behind, and marching over to get retaliation against the man who killed his father. He sets his mind on what he has to do, and sets off, away from his home, in a strong, purposeful manner. When Fortinbras prepares to march through Denmark, his address to King Claudius is direct, purposeful, and unemotional.
In the play, Hamlet, by William Shakespeare, the character of Fortinbras, has been used as a foil for the main character, Hamlet. Hamlet and Fortinbras have lost their fathers to untimely deaths. Claudius killed Hamlet's father, King Hamlet, and King Hamlet killed Fortinbras' father. Both Hamlet and Fortinbras have vowed to seek revenge for the deaths of their fathers. Since the revenge tactics of Hamlet and Fortinbras are completely different, Hamlet perceives the actions of Fortinbras as better than his own and the actions of Fortinbras, then, encourage Hamlet to act without hesitating.
In life, one goes through different experiences which makes and shapes us into the person who we become. Whether something as little as a "hello" by a crush or a death in a family, they contribute to the difference, as they are all equal in importance. In the play Hamlet by William Shakespeare, the protagonist Hamlet struggles throughout his life as he is in search of his true identity. The Webster's dictionary, under the second definition, defines identity as "The set of behavioral or personal characteristics by which an individual is recognizable as a member of a group." As life only moves forward for Hamlet, he struggles to find his place in life, nonetheless to revenge the murder of his father.
The relation between these two characters is a lot like the juxtaposition with Hamlet and Laertes. Just like Hamlet and Laertes, Fortinbras’ father, King Fortinbras, was also killed but the way he died was in a battle with King Hamlet. Hamlet and Fortinbras’ circumstances are almost identical. Their fathers were both murdered, both their uncles are on the throne and they are both princes of their countries. Revenge is the motive for both of these princes because of their dead fathers, but the way and the reason they seek it is extremely different. Hamlet wants revenge because the ghost of his father told him to and Fortinbras wants revenge to reclaim the land that his father lost when he died. Fortinbras is more focused on the honour of his country, Norway, but all Hamlet cares about is killing his fathers murderer. Hamlet’s morals slow down the process of his revenge whereas Fortinbras’ firm attitude makes him act faster. Hamlet later develops some jealously towards Fortinbras, he says, “Rightly to be great/Is not to stir without great argument/But greatly to find quarrel in a straw/When honor’s at the stake” (Shakespeare 4.4.53-56). Hamlet is saying that if Fortinbras is taking such quick action for a little bit of land that means nothing then what does that make Hamlet? He says in order for him to be great like Fortinbras he must take violent action. Hamlet and Fortinbras are both equally rebellious
Schacter, D. L., Gilbert, D. T., & Wegner, D. M. (2010). Psychology. (2nd ed., p. 600). New York: Worth Pub.
...nalyzed and executed as he planned. Fortinbras ability to act upon reason and not emotion is one of the most significant differences he has with Hamlet. Hamlet and Laertes represent the extremes of action. Fortinbras therefore, is the midpoint of the two extremes; his ability to reason and the act upon the reason has resulted in his possession of both lands and throne as he set out to avenge.
Hamlet’s psychological influence demonstrates his dread of both death and life. In Hamlet’s famous soliloquy, “To be or not to be” (3.1.64), he refers the “be” to life and further asks “whether ‘tis nobler in the mind to suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune” (3.1.65.66). By this, Hamlet is asking himself the question of whether to live or die.
"To be, or not to be, that is the question."(Hamlet) This is the question that plagues Hamlet through the entire play. Should I live or should I die, should I take revenge for my father's death? These are all issues that Hamlet battles within himself. Hamlet's indecision is followed by inaction. The reason for this struggle with indecision can be based on many factors or on a combination of a few.
Gunnar Bokland in “Judgment in Hamlet” explains Shakespeare’s attraction to the psychological dimension of the drama:
After arguments like Goethe’s and Snider’s were published came a wave in the early 1900s where psychological theories began to take firm root and have scientific backing behind their former assumptions. After publications of psychoanalysis were released, literary critics began to apply psychoanalysis to almost everything they could find, and what better a muse than Hamlet, which, as shown above, had already been widely debated on Hamlet’s psyche alone? An earlier one of these authors, Samuel Tannenbaum, wrote a 1917 article in which he applies Freudian theory to Hamlet’s sense of consciousness. He states that Hamlet has made a conscious decision to not kill his uncle; his moral human state could not bring him to be so villainous (Tannenbaum
Edited by Raymond J. Corsini. Encyclopedia of Psychology, Second Edition, Volume 1. New York: John Wiley and Sons Inc.