Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The psychology behind Hamlet
The psychology behind Hamlet
Hamlet and psychology
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
When it comes to Shakespeare's Hamlet, the debate about Hamlet’s sanity is constant. When only using the text, the argument is ceaseless. Nothing points directly to either side since the reader can see no emotion, no emphasis, no expressions. They have nothing but a monotone dialogue. Rather, the answer to Hamlet’s insanity varies with each performance.
The first scene to question Hamlet's sanity is in Act 2 Scene 2, when Polonius speaks to Hamlet and tries to discover the meaning of Hamlet's madness, if it is even that. In the 1996 adaptation of Hamlet, from director Kenneth Branagh, we see Hamlet glancing at the king speaking to Polonius just before Polonius approaches Hamlet.. As he comes up the stairs Hamlet jumps around the corner wearing
…show more content…
When Hamlet has his famous monologue of “To be or not to be”. The actor can take this from a scene of a sane man’s musing to an insane man’s rambling. In Hamlet (1996) Hamlet approached a mirror, looking to himself as he speaks. He stays calm and level headed through the scene, the only abnormality is that he holds a rapier as he looks in the mirror. Beyond this, there is no suggestions to Hamlet having lost any of his sanity. However, Hamlet (2000), portrays Hamlet in an entirely different light. Hamlet is shown reading a book, then in a sudden fit ripping pages and throwing it. He throws his glasses at a table and the glass cracks. He stares at them for a minute before picking a shard up, tasting it, then proceeding to cut himself twice in his arm. After this he falls to the ground and starts his monologue. He gets random bursts of passion, twice seeming on the verge of tears, and eventually rises. This isn’t something of a sane person. Especially when he cut himself since this is rather a sign looked for to identify people who need mental help. Again, in both scenarios the actions produced by the actors we not dictated by Shakespeare, they were put in place by the actor and director to give a certain edge of sanity or insanity to Hamlet and make him a more dynamic …show more content…
This is when Hamlet goes and talks to his mother in her bedroom. In Hamlet (1996) Hamlet enters the chambers and immediately an argument starts between him and his mother. During this he has no problems yelling at her and forcing her into a chair. As they talk he hears Polonius behind the curtains and stabs him without seeing him. He doesn’t know that it’s not the King till he falls dead and they see his face. Hamlet appears to have slight remorse, which only stays visible till he sees his mother is nervous. After this he throws her onto the bed and goes across the room, grabbing pictures of the current and old kind and coming up, throwing himself around her and forcing her to look at the pictures then throwing her back again. After this he yells at her until the ghost of his father shows up. When he does Hamlet stops, calming talking to the ghost and seeming slightly in awe. When the ghost leaves Hamlet finishes the conversation with his mother then leaves, taking Polonius’s body with him as he goes. Hamlet is clearly still sane in this scene. As in the scene with Ophelia, Hamlet makes it clear that he is in control. He throws her around and drags her as well, but never hurts her. Had he not been in control of himself he wouldn’t have had the ability to restrain enough to keep her safe. In this rendition we see the anger drawing a contrast from the lifeless words original written and from the idea of
There is a great controversy amongst those who have read and studied Hamlet by Shakespeare. People argue whether or not Hamlet had gone mad or not. Many people believe that Hamlet had actually lost his mind, while others believe that it was all just an act. Since Hamlet is the most widely published book in the world, besides the Bible, this question has been asked and analyzed many times to little avail. The answer is open to whatever one wants to believe, which may intrigue some and bother others. Throughout the play, Hamlet’s personality changed after certain events. The play starts with him very upset over his father’s death. Then, after he saw his father’s ghost, he became full of vengeance. He seemed to have completely
Hamlet is grounded in logic throughout the entire play. His logic is more blatant than the average man’s, therefore confusing some of the other characters. Rather than stating something profound in response to when Polonius asks what Hamlet is reading, he says only the most obvious and elementary of answers possible, “words, words, words” (2.2.192). This trend between Polonius and Hamlet continues. “What is the matter my lord?” asks Polonius. Hamlet answers, “Between who?” (2.2.193-194). Tenney Davis responds to this by saying that Hamlet feigned his insanity convincingly by taking things too literally, which manifested in a desire to “split hairs” (Davis 630). Hamlet was always annoyed with Polonius and his garrulous speeches, but reacted not in an irrational way, but to the contrary, with the most simple, though rude, coherent answers. If Hamlet were truly mad, he would not have been able to give make such a guileless and processed ...
In Hamlet, Shakespeare incorporates a theme of madness with two characters: one truly mad, and one only acting mad to serve a motive. The madness of Hamlet is frequently disputed. This paper argues that the contrapuntal character in the play, namely Ophelia, acts as a balancing argument to the other character's madness or sanity. Shakespeare creates a contrasting relationship between the breakdown of Ophelia and the "north-north-west" brand of insanity used by Hamlet in that while Hamlet's character offers more evidence for a contriving manipulation, Ophelia's breakdown is quick, but more conclusive in its precision.
As Hamlet transforms from a motivated intellectual to an obsessed griever, Shakespeare evaluates the fluidity of sanity.The juxtaposition of Hamlet’s desire to act and inability to do so unveils Hamlet’s inner turmoil, for as Hamlet disconnects from family, distrusts his environment, and forms an obsession with perfection, the audience realizes his fatal flaw and watches him tumble into the grasps of insanity. This degeneration forces the audience to consider how equilibrium between thought and action influences the conservation of sanity, not only for Hamlet, but also for all of humanity.
Throughout William Shakespeare’s play, Hamlet, Hamlet undergoes a transformation from sane to insane while fighting madness to avenge his father’s death. The material that Shakespeare appropriated in writing Hamlet is the story of a Danish prince whose uncle murders the prince’s father, marries his mother, and claims the throne. The prince pretends to be feeble-minded to throw his uncle off guard, then manages to kill his uncle in revenge. Shakespeare changed the emphasis of this story entirely, making Hamlet a philosophically minded prince who delays taking action because his knowledge of his uncle’s crime is so uncertain. To begin with, Hamlet portrays himself as sane.
In the first scene of Act II, Polonius and Ophelia discuss the meaning of Hamlet's odd behavior. Though the two characters agree his actions arise out of the torment of spurned love, they arrive at that point through very different means. At the beginning of the dialogue, Ophelia says that she has been "affrighted" by Hamlet in her bed chamber. (II,i 75) Her encounter with the Prince left her scared about his real intentions. She says that he looks like he has been,"loosed out of hell/To speak of horrors". (II,i 83-4) The very fact that Hamlet does not speak one word to Ophelia makes him look even more intimidating. By not speaking anything, Hamlet at once strengthens his image as a madman, as well as shrouding his real intentions towards those around him. Just following this passage comes a place in the text where we can see how the character of Ophelia has been manipulated by Polonius. After his "hint" that he might be doing this out of frustrated love, Ophelia says that that is what she truly does fear. (87) Her feelings of pity and concern are shaped by her father in order to fit his case of madness against Hamlet.
In Shakespeare’s play Hamlet the main character Hamlet experiences many different and puzzling emotions. He toys with the idea of killing himself and then plays with the idea of murdering others. Many people ask themselves who or what is this man and what is going on inside his head. The most common question asked about him is whether or not he is sane or insane. Although the door seems to swing both ways many see him as a sane person with one thought on his mind, and that is revenge. The first point of his sanity is while speaking with Horatio in the beginning of the play, secondly is the fact of his wittiness with the other characters and finally, his soliloquy.
Riddled with ambiguity by its very nature, the text of William Shakespeare's Hamlet has been a commonly debated subject in literary circles since its first performance. The character Hamlet undergoes intense physical and emotional hardship in his quest for revenge against his despicable uncle. This hardship, some argue, leads to an emotional breakdown and, ultimately, Hamlet's insanity. While this assessment may be suitable in some cases, it falls short in others. Since Hamlet is a play, the ultimate motivation of each of the characters borrows not only from the text, but also from the motivations of the actors playing the parts. In most respects, these motivations are more apt at discerning the emotional condition of a character than their dialogue ever could. Thus, the question is derived: In Kenneth Branagh's film adaptation of Hamlet, does the character Hamlet suffer from insanity? Giving halt to the response, this paper will first endeavor to establish what insanity is and will then provide sufficient examples both from the text, film, and Branagh's own musings on his motivations as proof that Hamlet's character, at least in Branagh's version of the play, is not insane.
Hamlet decides to portray an act of insanity, as part of his plan to seek revenge for his father's murder. As the play progresses, the reader may start to believe Hamlet’s “insane” act, but throughout the scenes, Hamlet shows that he knows right from wrong, good from bad, and his friends from his enemies. Hamlet shows that he still has power and control over his actions. As Elliot says “Hamlet madness is less than madness and more feigned”. Hamlet portrays a mad man, in order to be free from questioning, thus allowing him to have an easier path towards revenge.
Shakespeare's tragic hero, Hamlet, and his sanity can arguably be discussed. Many portions of the play supports his loss of control in his actions, while other parts uphold his ability of dramatic art. The issue can be discussed both ways and altogether provide significant support to either theory. There are indications from Hamlet throughout the play of his mind's well being.
Displaying an 'antic disposition', Hamlet first attempts to side step his trepidation by feigning madness. After meeting with his fathers proposed ghost, Hamlet attempts to distance himself from the thought or evidence of death. Hamlet notifies his friends, Marcellus and Horatio, of his plan to distract the kingdom from his real intentions. Although Hamlet proposes this as a way to fool those in Denmark, in the last lines of his meeting with Horatio and Marcellus, he curses that this revenge be placed upon him. This is the first indication of Hamlets reluctance to perform murder. Hamlet then returns to Claudius and Gertrude, at the castle, and acts out his madness for them and for the visitor, Polonius. Upon speaking to Polonius, Polonius picks up upon Hamlets 'madness', yet decides that this unnatural nature is because if Ophelia's behavior toward Hamlet. Indication of Hamlets fear is presented when Polonius asks leave of the prince. Hamlet then states that Polonius can take anything from him, anything but his life. Hamlet repeats thrice this idea of taking anything 'except [his] life.' Not only does this indicate how compulsive Hamlets fake insanity is becoming, but how afraid he is of dying. During the 'To be or not to be' soliloquy, Hamlet contemplates his view of death. As he go...
Logan Gaertner Mrs. Amon English IV 1 March 2014 Is Hamlet’s Insanity Real? Is Hamlet truly insane? While the play is not extremely clear on the matter and often contradicts itself, many of Hamlet’s wild ramblings and words of nonsense seem to be not the true words of a madman. Hamlet says that he is merely “putting on an antic disposition” (Act 1, Scene 5, Line 181). He admits very early on in the play that his insanity will be nothing more than a ruse to fool those around him.
During parts of the play one can argue, Hamlet is no longer feigning madness and has already crossed onto the side of insanity. For instance, during his meeting with his mother in her bedchamber, he begins to yell at her, scaring her in the process causing her to believe her own son is about to kill her (III, iv, 22). In that same scene he stabs and kills Polonius without the slightest hesitation (III, iv, 24-26), and then he essentially mocks Claudius and plays games with him when asked where he has taken the body. However, one can also conclude his erratic behavior only surfaces in the presence of these specific characters. When in the presence of other characters, specifically Horatio he is sane, calm, rational, and in complete control of his behavior. His word exchanges with Horatio are not from a madman, but rather
The obedient Ophelia has followed her father's injunctions and repelled Hamlets letters and denied him access to her. Polonius is certain that these rebuffs have driven Hamlet mad. His only action is to inform the king and queen, and to let them decide what the next move will be. In Polonius lengthy discussion with the king and queen he explain the situation:
Davis, Tenney L. “The Sanity of Hamlet.” The Journal of Philosophy 18.23 (1921): 629–634. JSTOR. Web. 25 Apr. 2014.